Replacement for NE5534 in a mixing console?

[diymixer]

hi all-

I'm just wondering: In the course of designing my mixer, using NE5534 chips for the preamps, mixing stages, and balanced outputs, I was wondering if there are any other opamps that can replace the NE5534s? I wanted to save a little money in building the mixer and thought that maybe using alternative chips can save me money.

[EBM_dude]

How about a TL074C?

[AndrewT]

the tl07x series do not tolerate capacitance on the output at all well.
They are not a good substitute.

The reasons for adopting the NE5534 are low input referred noise, medium bandwidth, excellent current drive, cheap.
Many can beat it but not at that price.
Many can better the price but cannot match it's performance. In it's price range, it is just about unmatchable for audio duty.
Even the clones cannot match it.

[EBM_dude]

D'OH!

[Mooly]

OPA604 ? Sonically brilliant I have found.

as Andrew mentions you won't better the 5534 on price/performance ratio, and the OPA604 won't match it on noise either at the impedances you'll be using... but tbh, noise from the IC (and we are talking degrees of perfection here) is the least of any problems IMO.

[ThorstenL]

Hi,

Originally Posted by diymixer

I'm just wondering: In the course of designing my mixer, using NE5534 chips for the preamps, mixing stages, and balanced outputs, I was wondering if there are any other opamps that can replace the NE5534s

Yes. However the best chip to use always depends on application.

For example, as some have remarked, the OPA604 subjectively sounds better, however, it has so much noise that a single chip Microphone preamplifier that works well using NE5534 will be way too noisy.

If you design from scratch, there are many Op-Amp's that allow excellent performance and can in a specific position perform much better than a 5534, though many have lower supply voltages and usually some limitations that make them less universal.

Past that there are also additional design techniques that may be employed to raise the performance of these Op-Amp's further.

To be more specific we would need to discuss the design in more specifics.

For generic use the 5534 in low noise stages and OPA604 in all others, all running on higher than average rail voltages are a good choice for low cost and acceptable cost.

Personally I'd likely choose other option if sound quality was a factor in the design.

Ciao T

[indianajo]

The pinout is different than a 5534, and there is no spec on channel separation, but other than that the datasheet on MC33078 is equivalent to the Phillips NE5534. I got mine for $.39, whereas my supplier is showing TI 5534's at $.89. You might find the 8 pins sockets cheaper than the 14 pin, also. I'm using the 33078 for replacement for hissing 4558 in a mixer I use to play LP's and CD's, the performance was fine. Peavey uses JRC 4560 in similar applications. Good luck.

[Bamalama]

Oh, for gosh sakes, use the 5534 (or 5532 dual).

It is dirt cheap (especially the 5532) and sounds good. There are more transparent chips available (4562, for instance) but many of them have imperfections that sound worse than those of the 5532.

It's not the highest fi but it is one of the nicest sounding.

B

[ThorstenL]

Hi,

Originally Posted by Bamalama

Oh, for gosh sakes, use the 5534 (or 5532 dual).

It is dirt cheap (especially the 5532) and sounds good.

That is a bit one-sided, no?

The NE5532 has a lot of input current and is not good at higher impedances.

There are many positions in a mixing desk where using FET Op-Amp's allows a greater freedom in design without necessarily being much more expensive.

Then there are positions where even the 5534 is too noisy (microphone inputs > 10dB noisier than state of the art). There are positions where the 5534 does not have enough drive (output, possibly mixing amp's).

One could of course add external parts to the 5534 to compensate that, but that kind of goes against the simplicity in implementation of using Op-Amp's in the first place and would point the way towards using discrete circuits.

So what is wrong with selecting the part best suited to a given job (first of all in an electrical sense, secondarily for sonic performance) and what is right with promoting a mediocre perfoming generic part that is not good at any of the jobs?

Ciao T

[SoNic_real_one]

For low noise I would go with LM4562. It has no flaws. For cheaper low noise (ok, not so low but still better than 5532) I would go with NJM2068. For higher load stages, I would stick to NJM4556.
Of course, those are duals, with singles is even easier...