well, it's time you play my game now that I've played yours...get some 1124ACN8 and roll
trebles are much more HighDef, bass is far nicer to listen to and SS is awesome!
low THD doesn't mean jack(look at the LME49722MA), actually the lower the THD the tamer the bass IME...ok back to the 1124ACN8 ftw, this one will be hard to beat
Ok, it's all clear now... You Burson is unbalanced like I have read, and you need something to correct it. Glad you found it.
Regarding treble resolution, no opamp I've heard so far has more than the LT1028. I love how it resolves the most minute details yet makes things sound so 'analog'. By comparison, the LME49720HA had the same level of detail resolution, but sounded much more 'digital'.
An emphasized bass is often a sign of higher distortion. Take the LT1363... it has an emphasized bass and is higher distortion
But the LT1028 is not too tame in the bass... That would be the LME49710NA, at most... or also the OPA827...
Last edited:
haha, now the problem comes from my burson final buffer? hehehe, well honestly believe what you want
I know some day you'll be bored of not rolling again, and will try the 1124...lemme know what you think on that day
bass on the 1364CN8 is way over the top, along w/ 2132P/2111KP...fully agreed! but the 1124ACN8 is much smarter than that...and I rest my case that the trebles are much more High-Def than on the 1028ACN8.
these chips are free, get 2 of them sent to a relative of yours and roll
hah, the LME497xxNA/MA are so bass shy that it's laughable to read everyone raving about them like if they were the 8th world wonder..
and I didn't choose the 1124 by luck of the draw, it's been recommended by a very experienced Chinese DAC builder.
I know some day you'll be bored of not rolling again, and will try the 1124...lemme know what you think on that day
bass on the 1364CN8 is way over the top, along w/ 2132P/2111KP...fully agreed! but the 1124ACN8 is much smarter than that...and I rest my case that the trebles are much more High-Def than on the 1028ACN8.
these chips are free, get 2 of them sent to a relative of yours and roll
hah, the LME497xxNA/MA are so bass shy that it's laughable to read everyone raving about them like if they were the 8th world wonder..
and I didn't choose the 1124 by luck of the draw, it's been recommended by a very experienced Chinese DAC builder.
Last edited:
The LT1363 would have a bass "way over the top" ?
I wanted to say it has a bit more bass quantity than I consider neutral, making for a slight loundness effect (that can be interesting). On the other hand, the LT1028 has more bass dynamics, the bass is more effortless...
And the LME49710NA was just slightly short of being neutral, not all that bass shy by any stretch of the imagination. BTW, the LME49723 sounds fuller than the LM4562/49710NA, as I've been saying... One of the reasons why I prefer it (together with a better, more engaging, tonality).
Sorry to disagree
I wanted to say it has a bit more bass quantity than I consider neutral, making for a slight loundness effect (that can be interesting). On the other hand, the LT1028 has more bass dynamics, the bass is more effortless...
And the LME49710NA was just slightly short of being neutral, not all that bass shy by any stretch of the imagination. BTW, the LME49723 sounds fuller than the LM4562/49710NA, as I've been saying... One of the reasons why I prefer it (together with a better, more engaging, tonality).
Sorry to disagree
Last edited:
yes ok, it would appear that 49723/725 sound better than 720/722...well 723 has a 10 times higher THD than 722 I think, so again low THD doesn't equal better SQ
1124 has a less invasive bass than 1364(I wasn't too lucky w/ 1363), that's all I'm saying..and the trebles are High-Def to death and very clean..a high GBW would only make things unstable if the circuit wasn't built for it IMHO...going from the 49720NA/HA to the 2132P on a few Asus soundcards I tried was a night and day...you went from unstable to perfectly stable.
put the NG97 on santa's list maybe, fit it w/ 2*1028ACN8 and 1*1124ACN8 for instance
PS: ah, SS is so great on the 1124
1124 has a less invasive bass than 1364(I wasn't too lucky w/ 1363), that's all I'm saying..and the trebles are High-Def to death and very clean..a high GBW would only make things unstable if the circuit wasn't built for it IMHO...going from the 49720NA/HA to the 2132P on a few Asus soundcards I tried was a night and day...you went from unstable to perfectly stable.
put the NG97 on santa's list maybe, fit it w/ 2*1028ACN8 and 1*1124ACN8 for instance
PS: ah, SS is so great on the 1124
Last edited:
I think there's a virtuous middle way... Probably in looking for the lowest distortion figures ever, they lost the musicality along the way. That's the weak side of those engineers, designers... making abstraction from reality. Hopefully not all of them though... or they wouldn't have created the LT1028. 
Anyway I haven't yet tried the LME49725 (which I do have); on paper, at least, this one looks more similar to the usual LM4562/49720.
Anyway I haven't yet tried the LME49725 (which I do have); on paper, at least, this one looks more similar to the usual LM4562/49720.
Last edited:
Ok, the LT1124 sounds like an interesting dual opamp. Anyway, what you say about it seems to fit perfectly the LT1677. Why not give it a tryyes ok, it would appear that 49723/725 sound better than 720/722...well 723 has a 10 times higher THD than 722 I think, so again low THD doesn't equal better SQ
1124 has a less invasive bass than 1364(I wasn't too lucky w/ 1363), that's all I'm saying..and the trebles are High-Def to death and very clean..a high GBW would only make things unstable if the circuit wasn't built for it IMHO...going from the 49720NA/HA to the 2132P on a few Asus soundcards I tried was a night and day...you went from unstable to perfectly stable.
put the NG97 on santa's list maybe, fit it w/ 2*1028ACN8 and 1*1124ACN8 for instance
PS: ah, SS is so great on the 1124
BTW, the LME49722 was the worst (least musical) of the entire series, for me. Its detail resolution was appealing, though. It's always an alchemy...
Last edited:
I did try the L1678 but SOIC8>DIP8 browndog's appear to be a no-no in a computer case...poor engineering at work, they all sound overly bright..end of story.
LME49722MA made my ears bleed, literally.
well, yeah...atm I'm in the market for a balanced/High-Def op-amp to feed the burson w/ a very clear DAC output...1124 on its own is boring.
w/o the burson, LT1364 remains a valid choice I think, it gives a nice tubey sound(many Prodigy HD2 and external DAC's owners run it)...but it's got nowhere near the same resolution and crazy SS as the 1124+Burson combo.
I'll try the other op-amps I told you about in PM, maybe they'll kill the 1124..time will tell
LME49722MA made my ears bleed, literally.
well, yeah...atm I'm in the market for a balanced/High-Def op-amp to feed the burson w/ a very clear DAC output...1124 on its own is boring.
w/o the burson, LT1364 remains a valid choice I think, it gives a nice tubey sound(many Prodigy HD2 and external DAC's owners run it)...but it's got nowhere near the same resolution and crazy SS as the 1124+Burson combo.
I'll try the other op-amps I told you about in PM, maybe they'll kill the 1124..time will tell
Last edited:
I found the LT1677 to be a little bit forward maybe, but with smooth sounding treble, and full mids. Minute detail resolution was simply great (better than the OPA211, leading to a better sense of ambience too).
However, after some switching, I did come to the conclusion that the LT1028 is the better choice if an all-round great sounding opamp is desired..
BTW, I don't know why but on the socket I did also perceive the LT1028 as sounding just slightly thin. The funny thing is that after removing the socket, this mild sense of thinness (perhaps just transparency) has completely gone away... Maybe it was partly thanks to the final addition of that 100uF Rubycon ZLH, or maybe just that my ears have been purificated by the constant use of the LT1028...
However, after some switching, I did come to the conclusion that the LT1028 is the better choice if an all-round great sounding opamp is desired..
Wouldn't that be precisely the LT1028?
BTW, I don't know why but on the socket I did also perceive the LT1028 as sounding just slightly thin. The funny thing is that after removing the socket, this mild sense of thinness (perhaps just transparency) has completely gone away... Maybe it was partly thanks to the final addition of that 100uF Rubycon ZLH, or maybe just that my ears have been purificated by the constant use of the LT1028...
Last edited:
in comparison, 1028 is too "thin"(maybe my circuit is really made for low GBW, I won't deny it!), and sounds a lot less lively. 1124 has the holographic 1364 SS w/o its distortion
It's possible that the LT1028 isn't very symbiotic with your circuit. But, if I were you, I'd try to leave it in for a few days, and get used to the new and different sound.
Maybe you just have to adjust yourself...it happens.too thin-sounding and not High-Def enough...ahhh, 1124 is pure bliss
if the next contenders don't convince me, this one will be soldered on the board(w/ cardas eutectic solder
OK, if it makes you happy... I guess it has a right to. But I don't buy the story that the LT1028 is less high definition than the LT1124, or anything else made by LT for that matter
This is all a put on, isn't it?
These two sockpuppet/trolls carry on at will and Glen and PMA get bin time.
Last edited:
