Yup, it's like that. The same thing for the OPA1611/1612 - you can forget it and completely enjoy music.
I think I'll put the LME49720HA inside my Pioneer..
Please take a look at what the golden ears of head-fi.org are saying right now:
Haha, I would've said completely the opposite! Almost:
OPA627 sterile and relatively artificial, OPA827 almost as sterile and a bit thin, LT1028 clearly has more life and magic despite being maybe a tad lean sounding, AD797 definitely more lifelike than the sterile OPA627 and almost sterile OPA827... and so on
And the most funny part is that the guy hasn't yet understood that the OPA1611 is the real deal in the latest generation of audio opamps; the OPA211 also being better than OPA827, OPA627..
...just a bit of evil mockery.
Haha, I would've said completely the opposite! Almost:
OPA627 sterile and relatively artificial, OPA827 almost as sterile and a bit thin, LT1028 clearly has more life and magic despite being maybe a tad lean sounding, AD797 definitely more lifelike than the sterile OPA627 and almost sterile OPA827... and so on
And the most funny part is that the guy hasn't yet understood that the OPA1611 is the real deal in the latest generation of audio opamps; the OPA211 also being better than OPA827, OPA627..
...just a bit of evil mockery.
Last edited:
One speaker I'm interested in is the Celestion F15. I owned the F10 and it was very musical. From reviews, the F15 seems to be better and that makes it interesting...
...also by virtue of the titanium dome tweeter (I've always preferred metallic tweeters, though the silk/polymer tweeters of my Monitor 30's are surprisingly good).
...also by virtue of the titanium dome tweeter (I've always preferred metallic tweeters, though the silk/polymer tweeters of my Monitor 30's are surprisingly good).
Andrea, since you're a notorious ground channel hater, I can't understand how you can have an oppionion on synergism between ground and L/R channels.
I always judge an (op)amp on how it colors the sound when added to a system and try to be objective.
I can't understand your negative view on OPA627 while liking eg OPA132. I think you're rather alone on this.
I always judge an (op)amp on how it colors the sound when added to a system and try to be objective.
I can't understand your negative view on OPA627 while liking eg OPA132. I think you're rather alone on this.
Why ground channel? I think the head-fi guy was putting them in the proper
audio channels, no? Sorry if I misunderstood?Anyway... it's always a bit of an exaggeration when it comes to words... I don't have an entirely negative view on the OPA627. It has its qualities. On the other hand, I prefer the OPA132UA even inside a 24V-powered CMOY.
The OPA2132 (P version) is pleasant, nothing too special. I'd really prefer to use 2 OPA132UA since they sound more open and transparent..
And I recently got the OPA132U to try as well, when I have a chance
To mock a mocker:
I've reported about issues using LT1028 where it oscillated when "dropped" in one of my amps. That was when using a single to dual SOIC to DIP adapter.
This time I tried LT1028 DIP version "dropped" in another amp completely stable with a nice square wave when using OPA827. This is how LT1028 looks with and without proper compensating caps. Andrea, guess which channel that's not properly compensated
So, LT1028 is NOT a drag-and-drop opamp. It has to be properly compensated.
How does it sound? Not neutral. No doubt it's brighter than neutral and slightly sibilant. Details and soundstage are good. More fun and alive than LM4562 but the latter is more neutral. Not as good as OPA827 or AD797. This is with no burn-in time, but I don't really believe in burning in parts other than for a few minutes.
I've reported about issues using LT1028 where it oscillated when "dropped" in one of my amps. That was when using a single to dual SOIC to DIP adapter.
This time I tried LT1028 DIP version "dropped" in another amp completely stable with a nice square wave when using OPA827. This is how LT1028 looks with and without proper compensating caps. Andrea, guess which channel that's not properly compensated
So, LT1028 is NOT a drag-and-drop opamp. It has to be properly compensated.
How does it sound? Not neutral. No doubt it's brighter than neutral and slightly sibilant. Details and soundstage are good. More fun and alive than LM4562 but the latter is more neutral. Not as good as OPA827 or AD797. This is with no burn-in time, but I don't really believe in burning in parts other than for a few minutes.
Attachments
What's the gain of your circuit?To mock a mocker:
I've reported about issues using LT1028 where it oscillated when "dropped" in one of my amps. That was when using a single to dual SOIC to DIP adapter.
This time I tried LT1028 DIP version "dropped" in another amp completely stable with a nice square wave when using OPA827. This is how LT1028 looks with and without proper compensating caps. Andrea, guess which channel that's not properly compensated
So, LT1028 is NOT a drag-and-drop opamp. It has to be properly compensated.
How does it sound? Not neutral. No doubt it's brighter than neutral and slightly sibilant. Details and soundstage are good. More fun and alive than LM4562 but the latter is more neutral. Not as good as OPA827 or AD797. This is with no burn-in time, but I don't really believe in burning in parts other than for a few minutes.
That said, check page 13 of the LT1028 datasheet for unity-gain follower configurations that are stable. Inside my DAC, at least one of the conditions (source resistance) was satisfied... and I'm pretty sure it was stable.
I don't consider the LT1028 as being unbalanced in an apparent way, nor sibilant... maybe when not working correctly! Try it in a DAC output stage... possibly the ACN8.
For me, in my application, the LT1028ACN8 was preferable to the LME49710NA since it had better body. I also found it had better midrange smoothness and body, and bass dynamics/presence (keeping an excellent articulation) than the OPA827, along with more lifelike tonality. So...for me it was not behind the OPA827.
But... the OPA1611 has all of the qualities of the LT1028 (no wonder...it's another very low distortion bipolar audio opamp), plus some LME49860-like roundness, and a touch of luminous warmth (from the LT1363?) which is welcome. In sum... awesome.
For the record... the OPA211 is like an OPA1611 with worse coherence and tonality. The OPA211 is another opamp I preferred to the OPA827 (better transparency, above all).
Last edited:
5 or 6, I don't remember. Still it took some hefty compensation to tame it. BTW, the square wave shown is 1 V @ 100 kHz.
In the DAC I'd also tried the LT1128ACN8, compensated for stable unity gain operation. It was very good too, but nevertheless I liked the LT1028ACN8 better...and it really didn't sound like it wasn't stable compared to the former.
You're right. It's not that many that listen to numbers and hear a red blue or green coloration just because companies give their opamps numbers and not names (you could tell a joke about zeroes and ones since everything is digital). I find OPA827 to reproduce whatever color thrown at it. It's neutral. I can understand why you appreciate exaggerated treble in a CMOY and dislike OPA627. It's because of the murky coloration of elctrolytic capacitors that make up the virtual ground.This guy really hears sound "in black and white" ...how sad.
Seriously... that's why we all (or most) have different preferences in sound... because we perceive/experience reality differently to begin with.
Why ground channel? Isn't lower distortion, better crosstalk and a truer subjective spatial reprodution reasons enough? No need to use large and expensive "audio approved" capacitors is another reason.
I definitely found the OPA827, as well as the OPA627 and even the OPA2107, to sound colorless to an extent. Not so the OPA132UA. You probably have a different idea of "color" than mine...no, surely
I don't appreciate exaggerated treble in a CMOY - the OPA627 has other issues, and I'm fine with its treble amount. The OPA132UA (which I prefer) certainly doesn't exaggerate treble, anyway, nor it has a 'spiky' treble for that matter.
Regarding active ground channels... it's an idea, especially in portable amps with battery power supplies. But ideally I'd want to see a beefy & low impedance dual regulated power supply. That's all!
I won't discuss the fact that I hear the colors associated to every number... it's something that really exceeds the opamp or electronics domain, anyway. It's a syntetic (synaesthetic) perception of reality what makes you realize all these unsuspected (by our rational reason) correspondences...that's all. It's a "plus" that certainly doesn't affect my evaluation of opamps negatively...
Last edited:
Note that I really wanted to like the OPA827, and it went in & out many times...
But I remember well that the last time it was in my Super Pro, replacing it with the LT1028ACN8 improved tonality/musicality and fullness significantly enough to make me exclude the OPA827 as the final choice of opamp.
Problem is, most people don't seem to hear sonic colors much... that's why, I reckon, they end up with the OPA827 or OPA627 as their favorites. Nothing wrong with it, but I'm not with them.
But I remember well that the last time it was in my Super Pro, replacing it with the LT1028ACN8 improved tonality/musicality and fullness significantly enough to make me exclude the OPA827 as the final choice of opamp.
Problem is, most people don't seem to hear sonic colors much... that's why, I reckon, they end up with the OPA827 or OPA627 as their favorites. Nothing wrong with it, but I'm not with them.