TI lists the LM4562 as active and has a datasheet from April 2013, this would rather
indicate that the LM4562 has not been relabeled to LME49720 (which is listed too
and has a datasheet of its own).
Either they did this for marketing reasons or the are different chips. (I have not compared
the current datasheets yet).
indicate that the LM4562 has not been relabeled to LME49720 (which is listed too
and has a datasheet of its own).
Either they did this for marketing reasons or the are different chips. (I have not compared
the current datasheets yet).
Compared the datasheets; everything identical to the last digit, except for the LME49860 where output current and offset are specified for the higher supply voltage.
The LME49720 is the only one still available in a TO-99 package.
I guess that the chips are identical with the LME49860 tested for higher supply voltage.
The LME49720 is the only one still available in a TO-99 package.
I guess that the chips are identical with the LME49860 tested for higher supply voltage.
And I have heard the rumor that the 4562 was Walt Jung's swan song to the DIY audio community - and is nothing like the other chip.
Do you think that TI/National would admit this?
My favorite IC is....
My newest favorite dual IC is the National LM 6172. It is a very high gain, low distortion, wideband opamp. It will work well in only the best designed and laid out circuits. I call it the 'Shrew' of ICs - very hard to tame but if you can it's rewards will be amazing. This IC is good enough that when running it as a headphone amp with a good pair of headphones I can actually pull out individual tracks of a multi track recording.
My newest favorite dual IC is the National LM 6172. It is a very high gain, low distortion, wideband opamp. It will work well in only the best designed and laid out circuits. I call it the 'Shrew' of ICs - very hard to tame but if you can it's rewards will be amazing. This IC is good enough that when running it as a headphone amp with a good pair of headphones I can actually pull out individual tracks of a multi track recording.
it is likely it is a different chip.
from a manufacturer's point of view if the specs are identical then the chips are identical,
it has happened before that the process changes yet the chip number stays the same so long as the new chip meets the published spec.
so it seems likely these are different chips & different processes with similar minimum specs.
The schematic might even be the same yet the processes might be different.
from a manufacturer's point of view if the specs are identical then the chips are identical,
it has happened before that the process changes yet the chip number stays the same so long as the new chip meets the published spec.
so it seems likely these are different chips & different processes with similar minimum specs.
The schematic might even be the same yet the processes might be different.
Last edited:
Nope, it's the same chip. It's confirmed by a NS employee. The reason is that their customers wouldn't change part number in their designs but on the other hand the marketing department created the LME series where E stands for "enhanced" performance.
An another example is TPS6120a and THS6012. Same chip.
An another example is TPS6120a and THS6012. Same chip.
Different sound?
So, you imply that one can hear a difference between two op amps whose THD is of the order of 0.0001%? Remarkable.
So, you imply that one can hear a difference between two op amps whose THD is of the order of 0.0001%? Remarkable.
Exactly! That is why I don't understand why we keep hearing these claims/questions about the supposedly different sound of op amps with minimal THD.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.