Discrete
I like the discrete ones.
I have a NAD C542 that I tweaked a "little" with better PS caps, schottky diodes, MKP coupling capacitors, DIP sockets, clock upgrade...
The opamps that I used were the LM4562, yesterday I've changed them to a discrete output stage from audio-gd:
http://www.audio-gd.com/enweb/pro/diy/OPA.htm
After some listening I definitely prefer those discrete stages, it just sounds better.
I like the discrete ones.
I have a NAD C542 that I tweaked a "little" with better PS caps, schottky diodes, MKP coupling capacitors, DIP sockets, clock upgrade...
The opamps that I used were the LM4562, yesterday I've changed them to a discrete output stage from audio-gd:
http://www.audio-gd.com/enweb/pro/diy/OPA.htm
After some listening I definitely prefer those discrete stages, it just sounds better.
Try giving either of these a listen:
OPA2107
AD8599
They are both dual channel opamps; the OPA2107 comes in both DIP and SOIC, but the AD8599 is only available in SOIC-8, so you will need a browndog adapter if you want to use it in a DIP socket.
IMO, these sound better than the JRC5532, and will not break the bank to try a pair of these.
Good Luck.
OPA2107
AD8599
They are both dual channel opamps; the OPA2107 comes in both DIP and SOIC, but the AD8599 is only available in SOIC-8, so you will need a browndog adapter if you want to use it in a DIP socket.
IMO, these sound better than the JRC5532, and will not break the bank to try a pair of these.
Good Luck.
Ok Danny, the NAD use LM regulators for +/- 12V, but the circuit have in serie 4 resistors in the power path to the opamps, after the LMs. The coils only will give a little current reserve and better HF filtering for the noise in the +/- 12V supply lines. I put coils in my C541 and listen some diferences, the sound get more smooth!In this case the higer inductance and lower resistance will give better power supply!The original resistors are about 200 Ohms, if i remember right! You should not have problems to get 4 coils with good inductance values and lower resistance than 200 ohms!
I bought recently mini coils with 1 mH (m not u) and 12 Ohms!
I bought recently mini coils with 1 mH (m not u) and 12 Ohms!
Hello Paluse,
I have the NAD C542 and the power supply is different than your C541, in the C542 there are no resistors between the LMs and the opamps. But it will be no problem to add some chokes just before the caps near the opamps. The only problem will be space: I already have MKP coupling caps, an external clock with its proper PS, the discrete output stage. What's the size of those chokes and where did you buy them?
Regards,
Danny
I have the NAD C542 and the power supply is different than your C541, in the C542 there are no resistors between the LMs and the opamps. But it will be no problem to add some chokes just before the caps near the opamps. The only problem will be space: I already have MKP coupling caps, an external clock with its proper PS, the discrete output stage. What's the size of those chokes and where did you buy them?
Regards,
Danny
Are you sure danny?!
The resistors dont appear on the schematic, but appear in the pcb layout! Just check if it exist in you C542!
By the way, the psu of the C541 only differs because it dont have standby mode, and some of the electrolitic caps and the diodes D501 to D504 are different parts!
The resistors dont appear on the schematic, but appear in the pcb layout! Just check if it exist in you C542!
By the way, the psu of the C541 only differs because it dont have standby mode, and some of the electrolitic caps and the diodes D501 to D504 are different parts!
NE5532's
hallo all,
can I please try and make the quiet comment, that there is a great variety of NE's? Originally conceived by Signetics in 1974? I think it was covered by one or more patents, so it gave Philips a definite edge when they took over Signetics sometime in the late 70'ties - early eighties. If I have not got this much wrong, then the patent(s) at some stage stopped being exclusive, so quite a number of other manufactures started producing 'clone' varieties of the original design. One of these is the JRC variety - others are TI-BB, Fairchild etc. etc. JRC or NJR (New Japan Radio and probably same wafer plant, at some point even tried to better the original design with an even lower noise 2114 version. But ladies and Gents the original Signetics variety (I think it even started with the 1024 number???), is still quite a competent beast...
If You have the opportunity - then please don't miss a chance to give it a good test?
One of the novelties about the construction is the output stage composed with Bipolar NPN's only. It's a quite remarkable construction, in as much as stil being very competitive (and very much used due to these days exelent price/value relationship) in overall performance even now 35 +years later. I believe Mr. Douglas Self is one of it's very devoted users/followers. I myself (said the big Danish dog), purchased my 1st ones back sometime in I think 1982 and the price was horrendous - something like £2.50 making equivalent 2day say ~ £20? And back then it was just so superior to anything else available - 741 & 357 ring a bell?
All the best
a1greatdane
London N4
hallo all,
can I please try and make the quiet comment, that there is a great variety of NE's? Originally conceived by Signetics in 1974? I think it was covered by one or more patents, so it gave Philips a definite edge when they took over Signetics sometime in the late 70'ties - early eighties. If I have not got this much wrong, then the patent(s) at some stage stopped being exclusive, so quite a number of other manufactures started producing 'clone' varieties of the original design. One of these is the JRC variety - others are TI-BB, Fairchild etc. etc. JRC or NJR (New Japan Radio and probably same wafer plant, at some point even tried to better the original design with an even lower noise 2114 version. But ladies and Gents the original Signetics variety (I think it even started with the 1024 number???), is still quite a competent beast...
If You have the opportunity - then please don't miss a chance to give it a good test?
One of the novelties about the construction is the output stage composed with Bipolar NPN's only. It's a quite remarkable construction, in as much as stil being very competitive (and very much used due to these days exelent price/value relationship) in overall performance even now 35 +years later. I believe Mr. Douglas Self is one of it's very devoted users/followers. I myself (said the big Danish dog), purchased my 1st ones back sometime in I think 1982 and the price was horrendous - something like £2.50 making equivalent 2day say ~ £20? And back then it was just so superior to anything else available - 741 & 357 ring a bell?
All the best
a1greatdane
London N4
Last edited:
Try the LME49725, LME49723, LME49720HA. My favorite National's. They're more musical than the LM4562.
Otherwise, the AD8599 is said to be a good substitute for the NE5532.
NE's and AD8599
Dear All,
Yes the AD8599 is very, very good indeed.
I have used it in a media centre, line level application, just after the DAC, as a replacement for 2068 and the improvement was seriously significant. Away went the over emphasized bottom end (however initially impressive it was), together with the quite unpleasant grainy image at the top. Sound stage image is very defined, precise and not least musical without any disturbing artefacts anywhere in the spectrum.
I have lately tried it for a low level cartridge level input application and it's very good (sound stage image again), but unfortunately lacks a little bit of resolution to be desired, at this small signal level.
But for line level - please 'go for it'!
There's a tread here on diyAudio started by me under the same headline: AD8599 for possible reference.
Kind regards
a1greatdane
PS: Think of it - better post a copy there as well...
Dear All,
Yes the AD8599 is very, very good indeed.
I have used it in a media centre, line level application, just after the DAC, as a replacement for 2068 and the improvement was seriously significant. Away went the over emphasized bottom end (however initially impressive it was), together with the quite unpleasant grainy image at the top. Sound stage image is very defined, precise and not least musical without any disturbing artefacts anywhere in the spectrum.
I have lately tried it for a low level cartridge level input application and it's very good (sound stage image again), but unfortunately lacks a little bit of resolution to be desired, at this small signal level.
But for line level - please 'go for it'!
There's a tread here on diyAudio started by me under the same headline: AD8599 for possible reference.
Kind regards
a1greatdane
PS: Think of it - better post a copy there as well...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.