SMD assembly is easier than THT. There are only a few packages that really demand reflow techniques and even that is pretty easy with a suitable heat gun.
I regularly solder 0.5mm pitch microcontroller packages down with no defects.
As DIY’ers, we really have to get a grip on this and move on.
I’m afraid the economics and profitability pressures of the semiconductor industry are never going to match up with audio company or DIY audio requirements. I tried to explain that to Charles Hansen (RIP) but he never got it. One of the divisions at the company I worked at were churning out 70 billion (yup, 70 billion) small signal SMD semiconductors a year. THT devices (TO-92 etc) were a tiny fraction of that so they stepped out of it and the assembly equipment was sold off to a Chines company.
I regularly solder 0.5mm pitch microcontroller packages down with no defects.
As DIY’ers, we really have to get a grip on this and move on.
I’m afraid the economics and profitability pressures of the semiconductor industry are never going to match up with audio company or DIY audio requirements. I tried to explain that to Charles Hansen (RIP) but he never got it. One of the divisions at the company I worked at were churning out 70 billion (yup, 70 billion) small signal SMD semiconductors a year. THT devices (TO-92 etc) were a tiny fraction of that so they stepped out of it and the assembly equipment was sold off to a Chines company.
Last edited:
Hiya Bonsai, long time no see.
"As DIY’ers, we really have to get a grip on this and move on."
You could be right, and I imagine once you're there and proficient in your CAD package, and probably have a mini-oven to put your boards in, you'll be a convert and wonder why you ever hesitated. But it's not so easy if you haven't yet done so, and you have to be pretty serious for it to even warrant doing. I wonder how many beginners are just put off electronics entirely because of the the obstacles to even starting. I hope you considered the points I made already, because I don't believe we should just be slavishly following modernity in this instance, especially when they have discarded our importance entirely.
One of the obstacles I have in front of me is going over to KiCad, which I tried 10 or 12 years ago and hated. It's going to be a huge learning curve but I want it not just because it has got better (and apparently is becoming almost the default package, rather like LTspice) but because of its integration with FreeCAD, which can then double on 3D printing. Of course I'm reluctant (and actually angry about it) because it's a helluva lot of time out of my life that isn't really going to get me much further ahead than I would have been. And my amps or speakers aren't going to sound any better for it - and may even be worse, if I accept the anecdotal evidence from manufacturers I know. For a beginner that's several months before they even start to do any electronics at all.
I am now going to go and look at your phono stage because I want to do one too.
I haven't had a turntable for over a decade now - I just found vinyl underwhelming and I hardly ever used my LP12, though I'd had one since the age of about 18. I now regret selling it, especially seeing how the prices have risen since. Mostly though, I miss the sweetness and musicality of my Naim 32, so want to have a go and see if I can recreate that in a deliciously analogue form, with lots of Class A goodness.
"As DIY’ers, we really have to get a grip on this and move on."
You could be right, and I imagine once you're there and proficient in your CAD package, and probably have a mini-oven to put your boards in, you'll be a convert and wonder why you ever hesitated. But it's not so easy if you haven't yet done so, and you have to be pretty serious for it to even warrant doing. I wonder how many beginners are just put off electronics entirely because of the the obstacles to even starting. I hope you considered the points I made already, because I don't believe we should just be slavishly following modernity in this instance, especially when they have discarded our importance entirely.
One of the obstacles I have in front of me is going over to KiCad, which I tried 10 or 12 years ago and hated. It's going to be a huge learning curve but I want it not just because it has got better (and apparently is becoming almost the default package, rather like LTspice) but because of its integration with FreeCAD, which can then double on 3D printing. Of course I'm reluctant (and actually angry about it) because it's a helluva lot of time out of my life that isn't really going to get me much further ahead than I would have been. And my amps or speakers aren't going to sound any better for it - and may even be worse, if I accept the anecdotal evidence from manufacturers I know. For a beginner that's several months before they even start to do any electronics at all.
I am now going to go and look at your phono stage because I want to do one too.
I haven't had a turntable for over a decade now - I just found vinyl underwhelming and I hardly ever used my LP12, though I'd had one since the age of about 18. I now regret selling it, especially seeing how the prices have risen since. Mostly though, I miss the sweetness and musicality of my Naim 32, so want to have a go and see if I can recreate that in a deliciously analogue form, with lots of Class A goodness.Imo there are more than enough tht components currently available for a beginner to learn with. It’s easy enough to use an adapter if you want to proto with smt. I designed by own adapter pcbs for my usage.
THAT Corp offer monolithic matched pair bjt devices.
I have never needed an oven for prototyping smt, I do it all by hand. Sure I do not do bga packages obviously. I have a hot air machine which is used for removal
The new version of kicad has supposedly a new GUI and is a major upgrade from previous versions so I have been told.
THAT Corp offer monolithic matched pair bjt devices.
I have never needed an oven for prototyping smt, I do it all by hand. Sure I do not do bga packages obviously. I have a hot air machine which is used for removal
The new version of kicad has supposedly a new GUI and is a major upgrade from previous versions so I have been told.
Old Philips semi has morphed into a few entities, NXP, Nexperia, now WeEn, glad they keep some old designs from obsolescence. Too bad BF862 got lost in the scuffel. I use the BYV34X-600 rectifier, none better imo, thanks Philips/NXP.
So what is better than a LM4562? More opinions than part options
Last edited:
I would think that a TI employee might get a laugh out of such a statement.
Once again translating a spec sheet into a sound experience, is a stretch imo.
I never spent the time to do a comparision by ear. How many else have bothered?
In one of Doug Self's books or articles he showed Onsemi measuring slightly better than TI, but he did not compare against original Signetics, I wonder why? or I missed it in a later edition, can't even remember if he was comparing a ne5534 or 5532, I would have to look. I kept a ne5533, it's a treasure now, it did sound nice back in 1980's, but I could have been high at the time
Think about if you are running production line, building a product that uses ne5534, would you not allow the TI part as an equal equiv. to the Onsemi or old Signetics? How about sub'ing a sa5534 in for a ne5534?
Last edited:
"Ho hum" is probably fair enough these days, but going back a dozen years I think it was pretty good. It doesn't have the 4 zeros distortion figure we can get quite easily now and noise was pretty average even then (but about the same as an OPA2604 which, bizarrely in my view, everyone raved about). If you don't like the NE5532 (which I don't) I'm not sure what you would have gone for that was obviously better save the super expensive things like the AD797. The 4562 was around then but I just found it too clinical. It was easily the nicest sounding of the chips I tried back then (though the AD8066 looks promising, now that it has been suggested here) but I may have been a bit lucky as I already had large bypass capacitors on my board (rather than just the puny 100nFs littered around) which it definitely needs (and now they are suggesting 4.7uF or more //100nF for the slightly faster LM7172) so it got a reasonably good crack at performing well. What I like about it specwise is that the PSRR is flat out to 6k and 3dB down at 10k. It's similar on the CMRR which is 110dB out to 20k and the input op amp on mine was done as a difference amplifier, so that helped. You can't actually see from the spec sheet how low the distortion goes as the frequency scale starts at 10kHz but it's -110dB at that point. But, no, it doesn't have 150dB of gain. I can thoroughly recommend it though, if you give it a nice supply, limit its bandwidth for noise purposes and execute it probably a little better than I did, you'll get a top class result.
I'd be very interested in what you'd suggest instead.
Last edited:
One of the 1st things I did when I got my UPV was compare THD+N of the Ti NE5532 against the Signetics. I had read on various groups such as this that the Signetics part was supposed to have an edge, but like any claim I read without proven stats to back it up, I was not expecting to see any difference and suspected it to be an urban myth. I was wrong. It was many years back, and I'm not sure where I put the data file, but the Signetics part had a very slight THD+N advantage in the circuit I compared them with (low gain and low input Z - difference was tiny, like 0.5dB). We're talking about artefact at well under -100dBv, so there is no peer-reviewed A/B/X-tested science to suggest that human hearing will be able to hear the difference. If I could get the Signetics part I would. Not because I think anyone will hear the difference, but I think better specs on an audio item suggest that the builder / OEM has integrity.
Ivor Linn thought similar with regards to transducers being in the same room with listening speakers and digital sounding 'bad'. When Lipshitz tested the theory using an A/B/X methodology, his belief was shown to be just that: https://bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm
Ti have been making 5532 / 34 for decades now. With the help of an AP, a few engineers have shown the Signetics part to have a fraction of a dB advantage. But considering the time they've been in production and how many million (billion?) are out there, no one has been able to produce hard evidence that a human can detect a sonic difference between the parts. I suspect that we are talking about a similar phenomenon to speaker cables and the like; if it looks good and cost you money, it will affect your mood and attitude towards it. I carry no torch for Ti and suspect their business ethics aren't any better than any other similarly sized corporation. But it would take a major leap of cognitive dissonance to make me think any human could discern between the 2 parts (even though I'd rather buy a tube of the Signetics!).
It seems that the measurement was made at low gain, so I think the influence of common mode distortion is large. I am also comparing 5532 from each manufacturer. This data was measured in 2008.
Measured at 20kHz, 5Vrms at G=+1, RL≒6kΩ.
It is written in Japanese,
This is a translation of the Japanese part and some notes.
”5532のメーカーによる相違” → Differences between 5532 manufacturers
NE5532 TI旧 → NE5532 TI old (manufacturers Around 1981)
RC5532 FC → (It says FC (Fairchild), but it may be Raytheon.)
NE5532 TI新 → NE5532 TI new (Although it is ”new”, it was measured in 2008.
)信号源インピーダンスRs (Ω） → Signal source impedance Rs (Ω)
It is true that the SIGNE has low distortion.
However, with SIGNE, I have the impression that the distortion increases the most when the load is heavy (like 600Ω).
"However, with SIGNE, I have the impression that the distortion increases the most when the load is heavy (like 600Ω)."
I would think that is true for ALL of the devices, not just the Signetics. Rather moot for my applications, however, as I don't have any instances where the load is 600Ω. I'm stickin' with the Signetics, IF I can find 'em!!
I would think that is true for ALL of the devices, not just the Signetics. Rather moot for my applications, however, as I don't have any instances where the load is 600Ω. I'm stickin' with the Signetics, IF I can find 'em!!
Anyone who listens to Ivor Linn (great name btw.) is on a hiding to nothing. Few companies in audio have known quite so little and been so confident about it. And anyone whose amplifier produces 100Hz spikes at the output (they thought a foot of cables to the reservoir capacitors was a good idea, so they could have them on the board) is a rank amateur. And lazy, too, because it should have arisen in testing, not when it got to John Atkinson. Their history is a litany of schoolboy errors and questionable practices.
Speaker cables, otoh, make a truly vast difference. People forget that the output is just one resistor away from the input stage, so of course it's going to make a difference. There are at least half a dozen mechanisms by which the do this. Bob Cordell has shown very clearly that they act as transmission lines and that the FR at the terminals is a mountain range of interference. We know that the capacitative loading at the very least changes the phase margin of the amp and that the DCR affects the response as it follows the speaker impedance. They act as aerials which, while the amp can do little about it, affect the PN junctions and, to quote Martin Colloms, run around the amp like water. There is also the triboelectric effect creating noise, which goes directly back to the input stage and is indistinguishable from the other half of a balanced signal. I'm sure I've missed a few (I really must do a note to myself summarising them all for when I come across someone who thinks it's a fantasy) but it most definitely is NOT in people's heads. Interconnects are even worse but that's mostly down to capacitance and the DCR of the ground shield.
re. "I pair the discrete JFET frond end with an AD797. But I am happy to pay the same money for an opamp, that other people pay for a vacuum tube "valve"."
Interesting! I've often thought of doing the same thing. I bet I could dig out an LTspice schematic with the same thing, only mine would show an LT1028 and a 27R or 49R resistor on the output.
Interesting! I've often thought of doing the same thing. I bet I could dig out an LTspice schematic with the same thing, only mine would show an LT1028 and a 27R or 49R resistor on the output.
Ah, that's what you were doing! I must go back and have another look when I have got time to concentrate, especially on the common base part where I couldn't really work out what the collector load was. I also didn't really see any actual "regulation" going on. No Vref being amplified, just some filtering. Incidentally, I'd also spotted what great parts those ZTXes are and was going to buy a stock of them, but here in the UK I can't find the 851/951s, only the 853s, which are slightly worse.
James Randi kept his 1-million USD.
(I don't dispute that badly designed 'audiophile' cables introduce instability BTW. I made the statement based on the idea that the cables are correctly designed and do not introduce excess C. But we should not derail this thread and get back to discussing OAs).
(I don't dispute that badly designed 'audiophile' cables introduce instability BTW. I made the statement based on the idea that the cables are correctly designed and do not introduce excess C. But we should not derail this thread and get back to discussing OAs).