...i found in thread this nice document
http://www.nanovolt.ch/resources/ic_opamps/pdf/opamp_distortion.pdf
so a lot of possibilities
http://www.nanovolt.ch/resources/ic_opamps/pdf/opamp_distortion.pdf
so a lot of possibilities
See post #98. LME49720 seems to be a good choice, although LME49860 is even better according to the chip-monks
but very expensive and only available in surface mount. But please use a very small capacitor in the feedback loop to improve stability.See post #98. LME49720 seems to be a good choice, although LME49860 is even better according to the chip-monks
thanks for your experience.
i will come back to you when the amps are in my hand
You can search for lm4562 lme49720 and lme49860 on this forum to determine their differences.
You wish to better than 5532, that can be harder than expected:
ES9038Q2M Board
But everything is fine when you enjoy any difference.
You wish to better than 5532, that can be harder than expected:
ES9038Q2M Board
But everything is fine when you enjoy any difference.
I actually did read it. And there is talk about different amps but no description of the sound compared to other amps but 'better'.
And if you had read the thread you would have noticed I did not only read it but posted myself in it from pretty much the beginning while your only 'contribution' was that stupid remark!
And if you had read the thread you would have noticed I did not only read it but posted myself in it from pretty much the beginning while your only 'contribution' was that stupid remark!
I think you're overreacting here, I was posting simple advice and I think you are taking it in a way it was not at all intended. Also I posted 8 times in this thread before that 9th comment. Please don't assume insult where there is none.
Several posts in the thread have compared the FX502SPRO to the TPA3116 amps. Yes, most say (including me) that it is significantly better. It has more and fuller bass. It has a lower noise floor than an unmodified TPA3116. For the price, which is not much more than the TPA3116 once you add in a power supply, I think this is a no-brainer to buy instead. I'd recommend it.
I also contributed to the discussion (here and on other forums) about the error condition that many/most of us have experienced with the FX502SPRO. While it is real and not what I would want, it doesn't seem to be an important factor to most normal uses.
Hmmm... ICG didn't reply to you, but to a clear bait that should have been silently ignored.
For my part, I have a TPA3116 card somewhere but I'm in no hurry to complete it.
The FX502SPRO on the other hand I'm going to compare to my TPA3255EVM. As is, with linear PS, with upgraded chip and so on. Just have to find the time.
For my part, I have a TPA3116 card somewhere but I'm in no hurry to complete it.
The FX502SPRO on the other hand I'm going to compare to my TPA3255EVM. As is, with linear PS, with upgraded chip and so on. Just have to find the time.
I have two TPA3116(D2) boards and one TPA3255 board. The TPA3116 boards cost about one tenth of the TPA3255 board.
My TPA3116 boards are fantastic value for money and I am also very happy (price-wise) with my TPA3255 board.
A direct comparison without taking the price difference into account is not really fair. But, if your neighbor passed by (assuming he is not an audiophile) he would not notice the difference (in sound) unless you put him through an A<>B test, and even then the result would not be certain. At a comparable price, I would prefer the TPA32xx but for a bit of DIY board experiments the TPA3116 is better suited, as you loose very little money when it burns off. The TPA3116 is actually very good and not just a silly toy.
My TPA3116 boards are fantastic value for money and I am also very happy (price-wise) with my TPA3255 board.
A direct comparison without taking the price difference into account is not really fair. But, if your neighbor passed by (assuming he is not an audiophile) he would not notice the difference (in sound) unless you put him through an A<>B test, and even then the result would not be certain. At a comparable price, I would prefer the TPA32xx but for a bit of DIY board experiments the TPA3116 is better suited, as you loose very little money when it burns off. The TPA3116 is actually very good and not just a silly toy.
Last edited:
I was comparing the pre-built units in terms of cost. If one was to buy a TPA3116, you would spend about $35 + power supply. The FX502SPRO is about $68 with a power supply. Totally worth the difference.
I think the FX502SPRO is noticeably better sounding than the TPA3116. I did a blind test with my wife and she easily picked it as sounding significantly better.
I think the FX502SPRO is noticeably better sounding than the TPA3116. I did a blind test with my wife and she easily picked it as sounding significantly better.
Sorry about the late reply.
The biggest difference standing out to me is the significantly reduced noise floor. As a result of this all sounds and details are more pronounced, everything is better mainly because of less noise, and the 5532 is probably a contributing factor in the well-articulated bass region. My wife also recommends it over 3116.
The biggest difference standing out to me is the significantly reduced noise floor. As a result of this all sounds and details are more pronounced, everything is better mainly because of less noise, and the 5532 is probably a contributing factor in the well-articulated bass region. My wife also recommends it over 3116.
While that, on paper, is almost the double price, it's still in the 'budget class' range (at least in my definition of price).
That's the point. Just saying 'better' does not help. In wich regard? Bass, treble, mid, dynamic wise, room impression, resolution.. ?
Thank you, that is a helping a good bit further. I'm thinking about buying one, that sounds promising.