
Home  Forums  Rules  Articles  The diyAudio Store  Gallery  Blogs  Register  Donations  FAQ  Calendar  Search  Today's Posts  Mark Forums Read  Search 
Analogue Source Turntables, Tonearms, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Tuners, Tape Recorders, etc. 

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
1st April 2013, 06:59 AM  #2351  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2006

Quote:
However in practice, things get a bit different: NE5532: OPA2134: LM4562: The NE5532 comes out best, followed closely by the OPA2134. The LM4562 is actually worse than both for this application. You can find the full measurements for all opamps here. This is actually quite funny, because lots of people around here do not recommend the NE5532, because the impedance of an MM cart would be to high. It's not. It's a perfect choice. I do note however that the frequency response of the OPA2134 is "flatter". This causes a bit more bass to come through, and a bit less treble. This might explain why people call the OPA2134 a "warmer" sounding opamp. NE5532 frequency response: OPA2134 frequency response: 

1st April 2013, 08:07 AM  #2352 
Richard Murdey
diyAudio Member

Interesting, but lets not get ahead of ourselves.
The predicted difference in the noise baseline is only about 3 dB between each successive op amp. That's difficult to see on an axis scaled to 140 dB and difficult to calculate given the many spurious peaks at 110 kHz. Also, we must think about the PSRR  different op amps have very different values, one can be letting in some power supply noise where the other is not. That could reverse the measured result from the predicted trend. Finally, a big one: GBWP. The LM4562 is a fast sucker, 55 Mhz. Too fast for this circuit really, it may likely have additional noise pickup from RFI interference and instability too. Though I would add that from where I stand, all three would be acceptable and the choice would largely come down to preference. I do not recommend using op amps with bandwidths over 10 MHz in any of my circuit boards, however. I have not tested for stability and the boards / power supply are not designed to operate at such high frequencies. Last edited by rjm; 1st April 2013 at 08:17 AM. 
1st April 2013, 08:26 AM  #2353  
Richard Murdey
diyAudio Member

Quote:
To anticipate your question "how can I know if it is correct or not?" let me answer that for you now: Because I said so. If you have further doubts, feel free to make your own investigations, ask the RIAA, whatever, I am not willing to waste any more of my time with this. 

1st April 2013, 11:07 AM  #2354  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2010

Quote:
I thought about your answer based on any calculations that makes me sure that the RIAA curve in your preamp is correct, and that these are not simulations .. Attempted addition of capacitance and resistance before a page is simply not correct.. 

2nd April 2013, 01:10 AM  #2355 
Richard Murdey
diyAudio Member

impedance of a resistor Zr(f) = R
impedance of a capacitor Zc(f) = 1/(i 2 pi (f) C) [or "j" if you prefer] impedance of a resistor and capacitor in series, Ztot(f) = Zr(f) + Zc(f) So tell me, what is not correct about the above? For everyone else reading: the beauty of impedances is that inductive and reactive elements in a network (inductors and capacitors, respectively) can be manipulated mathematically just like simple resistors, adding as Z1+Z2 in series and as Z1*Z2/(Z1+Z2) in parallel. The only difficulty is that the numbers themselves are complex, with real and imaginary parts. If you can use a computer to handle complex numbers, the analysis is straightforward. Now I'm curious. I mean, I thought everyone who was into DIY knew this, even if they weren't inclined to work through it themselves. Quick show of hands please: "the impedance of a capacitor is j/([omega]C" .... "Yeah, I knew that" Y/N? Last edited by rjm; 2nd April 2013 at 01:21 AM. 
2nd April 2013, 05:56 AM  #2356 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2010

We are still at the theoretical hearsay ..
I'm only interested in particular circuit, and values associated with it.. 
2nd April 2013, 06:06 AM  #2357 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2006

What RJM is writing is plain math. If you're doubting that (and the associated formula)  then maybe you should start to rewrite every electrical law?..

2nd April 2013, 07:11 AM  #2358 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2010

Here you go, use plain math and without simulation please calculate for me gain in this phono.. just 3 values.. 20 Hz, 1 kHz and 20 kHz.. thanx..

2nd April 2013, 09:27 AM  #2359 
Richard Murdey
diyAudio Member

I'm not going to. It's not for me or anyone here to do that work for you, especially when LTSpice gives the result with no effort!! If you doubt it, it's your job to prove its wrong, not ours to show you its right!!
Here at least is the approach: Divide the circuit into three parts: the input inverting op amp, output inverting op amp, and output RC filter. I will note the impedance of any capacitor as Z(C1) etc., defined as above. First stage gain: easy, as it can be assumed flat over the audio band, so gain1=R3/(R1+Zin), Zin is the DC resistance of the cart. Second stage, gain2= [Z(C3)R7R8+Z(C2)]/R4 (two bars '' means "in parallel with", single bar, e.g. M means (magnitude of M). Third stage gain3= (R9Zout)/(Z(C1)+R9Zout) Zout is the impedance of the following stage, not shown on your schematic. Total circuit gain in dB is 20 log (gain1*gain2*gain3). The above leaves out some high frequency components but will be sufficient to allow you to calculate the gain up to 20 kHz with sufficient accuracy. At least I think that's right. It's been a while and I do make mistakes. Good luck! Last edited by rjm; 2nd April 2013 at 09:30 AM. 
2nd April 2013, 10:10 AM  #2360  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2010

Quote:
Zout is 10k.. 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 


New To Site?  Need Help? 