New pre-amp kit just arrived in mail - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Solid State

Solid State Talk all about solid state amplification.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31st March 2003, 08:03 AM   #21
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: May 2002
Default Re: It isn't about specs only...

Quote:
Originally posted by jean-paul
... but NE5534 sounds significantly worse than OPA627.

somehow i do'nt think there are substantive grounds to justify this assertion.....i think susceptability to the subconcious, and wholy erroneous notion that 'higher price=better quality' may have more to do with it....
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 09:16 AM   #22
Cobra2 is offline Cobra2  Norway
DIY !
diyAudio Member
 
Cobra2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Stavanger, Norway
Send a message via Skype™ to Cobra2
Quote:
somehow i do'nt think there are substantive grounds to justify this assertion.....i think susceptability to the subconcious, and wholy erroneous notion that 'higher price=better quality' may have more to do with it....
In the same way any japanese amp shoud be better than an ALEPH?

Arne K
__________________
Don't believe everything you think...
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 11:23 AM   #23
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Thumbs up Better op-amps

Mikek,

I couldn't disagree more with you on this.
I'm with Jean-Paul.
It seams that you never tried an OPA627.
I changed NE5534s with OPA627/637 in many devices, and even did A-B tests with a phono preamp (I always use good machined sockets).
Even the OPA2604 is a much better op-amp than the NE5532, and it's cheap.
And the OPA2604 has lowsy specs.
But then... vinyl has lowsy specs and plays better.
Forget the specs and the graphics and test it, and than say something.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 12:04 PM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
Tube_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aveiro-Portugal
Default The Universal true...

Quote:
But then... vinyl has lowsy specs and plays better.
So you mean that vinyl must be universaly considered better than CD...because you think so!

For me it's not...i sold long time ago my Linn LP 12....Itok...Asak...more than 200 LPs...and i donīt regret!!

Whenever the people understand that their opinion(specially without cientific proof) is just their opinion...and it's only true for theirself!!

PS: For me also the NE5534 is one of the best op amp!
Do the null...and you will see!
__________________
Jorge
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 01:00 PM   #25
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Jorge,

It's my oppinion, you're right.
I have a good sound from my CD, but I still find, as always, that vinyl is better.
I always thought that.
For me, 16 bits/44.1 are just not enough for music.
Analog has infinite resolution.
In digital it's quantifiable, you always have a limit.
It's like comparing a good 35mm camera to a digital one.
In the beginning of the 80's I heard one of Phillips's first CD-players and the applauses from the audience seamed like it was raining.
But the press said miracles about that (and almost any) CD player.
I know it has came a long way since then, and much has evoluted for the better.
But it doesn't get to vinyl.
Any good analog source is better than any digital source.
In the beginning and in the end all is analogue.
Why convert it two (or more) times?
Maby your LP12 wasn't properly set up, or you didn't have the patience to listen to vinyl... Yes, CD is more convenient.
I don't blame you.
And did you listened to an OPA627/637?
I know you call that "fancy op-amps", but if this is fancy, so it is the NE5534.
You can try a better choice: TL071 .
It strikes me that a man that loves valves doesn't like vinyl.
Are you trying to "sweeten" the sound of your cd-player?
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 02:54 PM   #26
trwh is offline trwh  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
trwh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
carlosfm,

"And the OPA2604 has lowsy specs."

IIRC, its specs are very good.

"Analog has infinite resolution."

I should think the bandwidth of an LP is limited by many physical factors. Not to mention the finite bandwith of our hearing.

"It's like comparing a good 35mm camera to a digital one."

35mm film doesn't have a very high resolution. With 400 speed film, I can often see grain in scans from the negative where the images are only around 2000 pixels wide per frame.

"Any good analog source is better than any digital source."

Do you really mean _any_ digital source? I take it you are talking about recorded sources, in which case your statement is just not true.

"In the beginning and in the end all is analogue.
Why convert it two (or more) times?"

Because digital information can be stored in a more robust manner than analogue information.

I listen to and enjoy both LPs and CDs. You've got to be realistic about the shortcomings of any medium.

See ya,
/Tim - Still enjoys his LPs and his CDs
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 03:25 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Tube_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aveiro-Portugal
Default The infinit...the finnal frontier...

Quote:
Analog has infinite resolution.
And the surface noise!!...and the noise in the analog master tape!!!!..."What a wonderfull world"(Louis Armstrong)!!!..
Is dificult to achieve more than 60dB in a analog playback system...so infinite,i don't think so!!...
Quote:
Any good analog source is better than any digital source.
So i hope that they use a analog source at the demonstration of the Halcro (at Transom)...for to make justice to this splendid amplifier...if not????
Quote:
I don't blame you.
Fortunately!!! Huff!!!!

Quote:
Maby your LP12 wasn't properly set up,
I espect that!!...yes it was properly set up (in my humble opinion)...just for the record i have constructed a tone arm for a Thorens TD160 before owning the Linn ...so i think i have some experience in tourntable set up... but maybe you have more!!

Quote:
You can try a better choice: TL071
Are you kidding???...right!!
Quote:
It strikes me that a man that loves valves doesn't like vinyl.
I love valves...i love transistors ...i love mosfets...
I have projected and builded many amps with all this technologies...and a good amp is a good amp independent of technologie!
I'm not a fundamentalist!!
And if you say so because of my nick name (tube Dude) ...i must say that i use it because it was what my oldest son use to call me...and not to express any particular preference!
__________________
Jorge
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 03:44 PM   #28
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Tim,

Just try a good 100 ISO tranny, forget the negatives.
Or better still, Fuji Velvia, 50 ISO.
I project those on a 2 meter screen and you can't see grain.
Now print a 2 meter image of your digital camera.
Color grades are infinite in analog (like in analog tv), but in digital they have a limit (normally 16 million in plasma/LCD tv).

When I talk about resolution I'm not talking about bandwidth, it's got nothing to do with it.
I see you don't know what you are talking about...

I know digital medium lasts longer, there are some advantages, it's not all bad.
I like to listen to CDs too.

But I would prefer to have a Nagra 4s at home that any studio DAT or digital recorder of any type.
And the Nagra keeps it's value, while a digital recorder doesn't worh any money after a few years.
But that's what digital is all about, isn't it?
I would better have a Leica M6 camera than any digital camera you mention.

Some of the best studios have always kept recording in analog, even today.
Others spend millions with digital gear every 2 or 3 years, because it's always changing and evoluting.
These last ones (the digital ones) are responsive for 90% of the crappy digital master recordings made in the 80s and 90s.
The others (the analog ones) feel happy to have recorded in analog master tapes, and to release remasters in SACD that justify it.
From a nasty old 16 bits master, you can remaster to SACD, but there's nothing you can do to get good sound.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 05:41 PM   #29
trwh is offline trwh  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
trwh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
"When I talk about resolution I'm not talking about bandwidth, it's got nothing to do with it.
I see you don't know what you are talking about..."

Ooops, yes a very basic mistake on my part. I shall be more careful to read though my posts before I reply in future.

FWIW, I use a 35mm SLR camera, not digital. I am impressed that you get such good results from your slide film. I have used 400 speed slide film in the past, and I could see grain on my screen - about 1.5m width. I shall try a slower film in future.

"Some of the best studios have always kept recording in analog, even today.
Others spend millions with digital gear every 2 or 3 years, because it's always changing and evoluting.
These last ones (the digital ones) are responsive for 90% of the crappy digital master recordings made in the 80s and 90s.
The others (the analog ones) feel happy to have recorded in analog master tapes, and to release remasters in SACD that justify it.
From a nasty old 16 bits master, you can remaster to SACD, but there's nothing you can do to get good sound."

From what you say, it seems that older digital equipment sacrificed sound quality. However, I find it hard to believe that a modern digital recording could be bettered by a modern analogue tape recording. I admit though, I haven't done a comparison.

See ya,
Tim.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 06:23 PM   #30
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
 
jean-paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Germany
Quote:
somehow i do'nt think there are substantive grounds to justify this assertion.....i think susceptability to the subconcious, and wholy erroneous notion that 'higher price=better quality' may have more to do with it....
If you listen to them you'll talk a different story. I never look at the price or the reputation a part has, I just listen after having them in the device for some time. OPA627/637 are the best I know till now and I tried a lot. Since I bought them in bulk the price was reasonable for the quality they offer.

Spec hunting is nice but it doesn't really say something about how a chip actually sounds. I do look carefully at parameters though.

Some time ago I switched opamps C4570 in a cd player for simple OPA2604's and in this case the results were quite extreme. There are more factors involved than specs alone. I also have tried opamps with superior specs that were not musical at all.
__________________
It's only audio. Official member of the Norske Brillegeit Gang.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ZV4 has arrived. Nelson Pass Pass Labs 76 8th October 2014 04:04 PM
New toy has arrived! I_Forgot Digital Source 0 1st February 2008 01:57 AM
New parts arrived & will foloow with kit, !!!!S1 12pcs arrived from Holland!!!! tube-lover Swap Meet 1 4th September 2004 12:29 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:17 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2