I don't think anyone is trying to 'drown' your opinion by just stating their own.
Old and new. Means crossing senses. There is the scientific meaning which is about evoking more senses than the one strictly triggered, and there is a wider meaning in every day talk, understanding the whole implications of an act that is. So ''asynesthetos'' popularly means the one who does something without caring about the impact complexities of his action(s), in modern Greek. Can be used about throwing a lit cigarette near (in)flammable material for instance.
Which kinda reminds me and leads me to the usefulness question of this thread as raised by many.
Audioman54 described how he systematically used subjective means employing several differently trained people in DBT ranging from analogue design legend Bob Pease to a secretary in staff and a piano player, so to put some interesting packaging and single/mono chip clues into order and try to scientifically examine from then on. Alas, it wasn't meant to be.
Just because you keep on amassing non controlled ''perfect storm'' subjective data by exchanging op amps at machine gun rate, on some application that nobody knows how each one chip interacts with, its expectable that you gonna get complains. Not because you can hear differences, their very NatSemi designer confirmed that between packages even, but because you may very well confuse non experienced people by quickie recommendations without any kind of steady subjective comparison and tech check system. This is exactly an ''asynesthetos'' practice.
If the complains will keep on mounting and tension breaks loose, keep in mind that a ''lock thread'' isn't something unknown here. Its either a thread gives some tangible info or it tumbles down to a snake pit, even if typical civility is maintained on edge by the participants. After a point has been made i.e. ''I can hear many different sounds by exchanging op amps on my X PC card, and I prefer those 3'' its either there is production of some conclusion based on some system that people can refer to, or it is just boring to many, provocative to some, baggage to DIYA. We had in the past many subjective op amp threads but there is nobody I can recall that was pushing it conclusively so hard. Hold your horses.
lol, did I miss something? what did we do that deserves a lock exactly?
there's many op-amp rolling threads accross many audio forums...of course, it's all subjective...of course, it's to be taken w/ the greatest "IMVHO YMMV" attitude.
I found the LME4972xNA/MA to be totally worthless in my applications, but some ppl like them(the story doesn't tell whether they'll be bored of the inexistent low end bass after a while)...I think instead of ppl whining about this thread, they'd be better off starting rolling as we do and share their experiences...or move on? we never said we were EE's that trust their oscilloscope more than their ears.
all the "best" threads are subjective by essence...it's even forbidden to talk/ask about the "best" on some forums.
no hard feeling I hope
lol, did I miss something? what did we do that deserves a lock exactly?
Read again what you quoted. Since your ''reviewing'' practice, rhythm, wit and style, attracts noise complains, you should always handle it correctly as by the threadstarter and main reporting participants before it mounts into everyday tension. Its just experience info I am passing you, that if something is too hot in the end it could get a lock. DIYA has many very well versed in tech members and/or also having many years of systems building and parts practice, the repetitive complains are mainly about not relaying something useful by not being systematic. I did not write ''you deserve'', I just said you got the ingredients gathered for such a possible scenario. Don't put words in my mouth. Its just an older fellow member's input since you are relatively new members here. The thread starter especially is very fresh. No badge I flashed around.
Nobody will kill a thread if you will not keep on using names personally like you just did about people that in one way or another, tell you that you better introduce some tempo & order to your info. You may kill a thread if it flames by such posts potentially harshly replied. If you think that those guys have no subjective experience in ''audio'' labelled in datasheet chips, just remember how deeply Audioman54 was conscerned about matters like that, by describing his methods before releasing all those last NatSemi chips. They just never talk off hand. You just failed to understand the friendly advice I gave you about self controlling the thread. Mods are here not to avoid what members must avoid, but to intervene when things get out of hand by the way. So not be surprised if you potentially see your above post gone to Texas or any penalty at any time a mod feels he must, after the post maybe reported by just anybody and by having talked with the team. It will not be me, because its customary here that a thread participant member that happens also to be a mod avoids action against posts, posters, thread, beyond some basic level OT cleaning etc so not to show bias.
well, you can count on scott wurcer to keep on talking to use as if we were 5yo kids...I had no ideas haters and naysayers could kill a thread, I thought mods were here to avoid exactly that. anyway, yeah we're not potential nobel prize winners
This thread has not even touched on methodology. If we dug deeper I fully expect comments like "in five seconds this amp sent me screaming out of the room". If you act like five year old kids expect to be treated as such.
Again an op-amp having "non-existant low end bass" is so absurd it does not deserve serious attention.
Last edited:
Keep on twisting my words...some ppl may like to roll op amps blindly I said, when some people may come and say to them its futile or even annoying or boring, and if war starts, the ones who paint others gonna get it first, and eventually a thread may get it too, as I have seen happening here a few times in the past. That is what I said, and I recommended you be the most relaxed in that, since you rollers ehmm, roll this thread.
Keep on twisting my words...some ppl may like to roll op amps blindly I said, when some people may come and say to them its futile or even annoying or boring, and if war starts, the ones who paint others gonna get it first, and eventually a thread may get it too, as I have seen happening here a few times in the past. That is what I said, and I recommended you be the most relaxed in that, since you rollers ehmm, roll this thread.
Does this thread among a zillion others really annoy you that much?
Well, it sees. Talk about not caring for the impact complexities of your actions... You're trying so hard to accomplish your censorship!!
BTW, have you maybe noticed that I have finished "rolling"?
I think it's obviously so, instead. Because, they keep on presenting their personal opinion as unquestionable facts. But, for me, I'm supported by my extensive practical experience collected over time... which instantly reveals the tendentious (whether consciously or...not entirely) nature of their argument.
Last edited:
Does this thread among a zillion others really annoy you that much?
You're trying so hard to accomplish your censorship!!
BTW, have you maybe noticed that I have finished "rolling"?
Personally no. It does not annoy me at all. My posts are there for everybody to see and decide if they had anything to do with censorship or were about sense. If you don't see any synesthesia to them its alright by me. I have nothing to add any way. Happy op amping, a dedicated roller never stops rolling, just pauses.
Andrea,
This isn't a trick question just try and explain something to me.
You have reordings you listen too (CD ? or maybe vinyl/reel/reel etc) However those recordings were made and produced originally sets a baseline... and I'm sure many of those recordings have passed through many opamps etc that you perhaps wouldn't pick as a personal choice.
So let's say you have a piece of music that's passed through some NE5532's or LM833's etc on it's way to the CD.
You come along and in the final stages of the replay chain use type "xxxx" opamp and you decide it's the best thing you have ever heard... totally "transparent" and I am not doubting for a moment that "different" devices do sound "different" in a given application.
Don't you think what you are really finding is that a particular device is "colouring" the sound in some way that you like ? and that the results you get are so very dependant on the equipment and circuit configuration used in that equipment.
If it alters the sound in some way it can't be "transparent"
It would be an interesting exercise for you to add another couple of pure buffer stages (correctly implemented) onto the output of whatever it is you are modifying and compare different opamps again.
The "transparent" one is the one that would sound identical to removing the test buffer. However if you then used that one in your DAC or whatever you may well not like it and prefer something else.
This isn't a trick question
just try and explain something to me.You have reordings you listen too (CD ? or maybe vinyl/reel/reel etc) However those recordings were made and produced originally sets a baseline... and I'm sure many of those recordings have passed through many opamps etc that you perhaps wouldn't pick as a personal choice.
So let's say you have a piece of music that's passed through some NE5532's or LM833's etc on it's way to the CD.
You come along and in the final stages of the replay chain use type "xxxx" opamp and you decide it's the best thing you have ever heard... totally "transparent" and I am not doubting for a moment that "different" devices do sound "different" in a given application.
Don't you think what you are really finding is that a particular device is "colouring" the sound in some way that you like ? and that the results you get are so very dependant on the equipment and circuit configuration used in that equipment.
If it alters the sound in some way it can't be "transparent"
It would be an interesting exercise for you to add another couple of pure buffer stages (correctly implemented) onto the output of whatever it is you are modifying and compare different opamps again.
The "transparent" one is the one that would sound identical to removing the test buffer. However if you then used that one in your DAC or whatever you may well not like it and prefer something else.
Here's my theory (or rather my finding) in this regard:
A record that I like will always sound good to me. Conversely, a record that I dislike will not sound good to me.
There isn't, for me, such a thing as "bad music that's pleasing to listen". Were it for me, I'd make a great fire of all those audiophile test CDs...
Sooo... well, it's simple: staying true (in terms of hi-fi reproduction) to a certain record, is allowing it to express the particular emotional world condensed into it in the most emotionally effective way for the particular listener. That's why it's oh so vital to only use records that you really like - not just records that are well recorded. Or you'd just be looking for a formal correctness that has very little to do with a comprehensive notion of good sound (which, from this point of view, is a subjective notion).
Bottom line, I don't formalize myself that much
You don't take one record as a reference... you take all your collection of favorite music as the reference, if it's transparency you're looking for...
That said, as I mentioned before, I'm not always and purely looking for transparency. Or I'd be looking for an ideal good that doesn't exist in real life.
When I say "transparent" I'm saying "I hear it less than the other parts".
Take the LME49723... this is a favorite of mine because it's a jack of all trades that does many things right, rather than for its "transparency". I just like it. Much like many people like the NE5532 (to which the LME49723 has to be technically slightly superior).
It's not just for fun that I've been mentioning that there's another opamp stage in my audio chain, i.e. a JRC 4570 which does the preamp stage in my integrated amp...
Have a look: LT1028 + JRC4570 = 124578, six different numbers with just two different opamps. No surprise that the ensemble sounds tonally well balanced
Last edited:
Dear mooly,
you described exercise might just possibly be a little bit to scientific for some people?
It's however more or less exactly they way some of us 'have gone around the issue', in a professional context...
You 'simply' select the one in blind A vs. B chip session, that least influences the perceived, among a trusted and approved panel of listeners, image.
The A vs. B is repeatedly done with various bit of material incl. live voice.
When a hopeful concord is achieved - that's Your winner and then the big one in business sense moves in: Can You afford it? Do You need to negotiate a better price break etc. etc.
Kind regards
a1greatdane
you described exercise might just possibly be a little bit to scientific for some people?
It's however more or less exactly they way some of us 'have gone around the issue', in a professional context...
You 'simply' select the one in blind A vs. B chip session, that least influences the perceived, among a trusted and approved panel of listeners, image.
The A vs. B is repeatedly done with various bit of material incl. live voice.
When a hopeful concord is achieved - that's Your winner and then the big one in business sense moves in: Can You afford it? Do You need to negotiate a better price break etc. etc.
Kind regards
a1greatdane
Dear Magz,
many tnx for riposte.
I have tried the OPA827 and had a slight problem with it in the upper end of the register where I found the OPA627 a better choice. The application was line level balanced receiver/buffer before Volume control on an amp active HP in front, so the bass performance was self given less critical.
There is however one quite big difference between OPA211 and OPA827.
The former has bipolar LTP and the later fet's?
More 'food for thought' possibly?
Kind regards
a1greatdane
many tnx for riposte.
I have tried the OPA827 and had a slight problem with it in the upper end of the register where I found the OPA627 a better choice. The application was line level balanced receiver/buffer before Volume control on an amp active HP in front, so the bass performance was self given less critical.
There is however one quite big difference between OPA211 and OPA827.
The former has bipolar LTP and the later fet's?
More 'food for thought' possibly?
Kind regards
a1greatdane