Yes, but I can't remember....
About the sound of op-amps: to me the OPA(2)134 is the winner, but because of the noise in some circumstances not always applicable.
In a I/V-converter I prefer the expensive LT1028 in the first stage (look at my website...)
The Texas Instruments NE5534 and 5532 are junk
The Texas Instruments NE5534 and 5532 are junk, I literally got kicked out of the recording studio when I put them in as replacements in Neve and TASCAM gear. They have a gritty sound, lots of LF noise.
I worked on a product that used the NE5534 unconventionally, adding DC+AC feedback to the compensation pins. The Philips/Raytheon/Signetics parts work fine but we tried the TI NE5534's and the circuit just latched up. Phone calls to TI engineers, they said the part "is equivalent and meets the specs" but obviously its internals are different. I think it's a die shrink and different BP fab they use.
The Texas Instruments NE5534 and 5532 are junk, I literally got kicked out of the recording studio when I put them in as replacements in Neve and TASCAM gear. They have a gritty sound, lots of LF noise.
I worked on a product that used the NE5534 unconventionally, adding DC+AC feedback to the compensation pins. The Philips/Raytheon/Signetics parts work fine but we tried the TI NE5534's and the circuit just latched up. Phone calls to TI engineers, they said the part "is equivalent and meets the specs" but obviously its internals are different. I think it's a die shrink and different BP fab they use.
The Texas Instruments NE5534 and 5532 are junk, I literally got kicked out of the recording studio when I put them in as replacements in Neve and TASCAM gear. They have a gritty sound, lots of LF noise.
QUOTE]
Ohhh, I thought TI bought Burr Brown.... Hmm. I think I will stick to the OPA314, also from Burr Brown... Ehhh, sorry: Texas Instruments!
Dear Panson,
Just my 2 cents. When I started my audio modification company almost a decade ago, I was very pre judged about the NE5534. I removed it everywhere and replaced it without even thinking. It could't ever be good. During the years when I learned more and more, and when I had to design really low noise designs myself, I started to understand and see the beauty of the NE5534's
Once good implemented they turn out not to be that bad at all! One of the best things of the NE5534's is PIN5. This gives us opportunities to make a real good sounding preamp. If you use the NE5534's as first stage with a voltage follower after (or a composite circuit) you can drive the voltage follower stage directly from the NE5534's VAS from pin 5. This VAS is biased in class A for small currents. Second, you can use pin 5 to add a current source to bias the thing in class A even further.
The best thing I've ever heard was a mic pre-amp with many NE5534's paralleled to reduce noise, and each of the many NE5534's was biased in class A bit deeper with a LED circuit on pin 5. No burrbrown, or any opamp could beat this incredible depth and dynamics.
So conclusions. My mind changed the last decade. From absolute hate I now love the NE5534, now I really understand the thing.
With kind regards,
Bas
<QUOTE>
Just my 2 cents. When I started my audio modification company almost a decade ago, I was very pre judged about the NE5534. I removed it everywhere and replaced it without even thinking. It could't ever be good. During the years when I learned more and more, and when I had to design really low noise designs myself, I started to understand and see the beauty of the NE5534's
With kind regards,
Bas</QUOTE>
Bas, with which op-amp did you replace the 5534 at those days?
Henk ten Pierick developped a measuring method with which he could rank tubes, tube-amps, solid state amps, op-amps, name it, on sound quality. He is very mysterious about it but with a number of experienced listeners we agreed with his ranking, every time!
He was very pleased by the LT1028 (expensive!) and the OPA314, so I nearly always use the OPA(2)314. The LT1028 I reserve for the I/V-convertor in DAC's. (look at my web site: by-rutgers.nl)
Douglas Self wrote a new book: Small Signal Audio Design in which he breaks a lance for the 5534......... but, I'm not sure if he is a good listener...
BTW. What is wrong with my QUOTES??????
Just my 2 cents. When I started my audio modification company almost a decade ago, I was very pre judged about the NE5534. I removed it everywhere and replaced it without even thinking. It could't ever be good. During the years when I learned more and more, and when I had to design really low noise designs myself, I started to understand and see the beauty of the NE5534's
With kind regards,
Bas</QUOTE>
Bas, with which op-amp did you replace the 5534 at those days?
Henk ten Pierick developped a measuring method with which he could rank tubes, tube-amps, solid state amps, op-amps, name it, on sound quality. He is very mysterious about it but with a number of experienced listeners we agreed with his ranking, every time!
He was very pleased by the LT1028 (expensive!) and the OPA314, so I nearly always use the OPA(2)314. The LT1028 I reserve for the I/V-convertor in DAC's. (look at my web site: by-rutgers.nl)
Douglas Self wrote a new book: Small Signal Audio Design in which he breaks a lance for the 5534......... but, I'm not sure if he is a good listener...
BTW. What is wrong with my QUOTES??????
Last edited:
My favorite was the expensive OPA627. But over the 10 years I realized my personal taste also changed, from laid-back till more black and micro detailed sounding. I also love the AD797 but this one is harder to implement, and often not well enough understood by some modders, to make it sound good. Another one was the AD8620, (AD8610 for single) which still have for me the best Bass I've ever heard from any IC. So tight, dry and controlled.
But all in all (I feel gonna get flamed soon for this
) I think the NE5534's when used creative are still neutral, and can provide everything we wish for sound wise.Ps. It all depends on application as well. If I had to use opamps for I-V conversion, I would always use the AD797 with the little trick from the AD797 datasheet I-V application to shunt HF.
With kind regards,
Bas
Last edited:
With the AD797 I-V conversion trick I meant this one in the attachment. I don't get it why I never read more about this. It is for me the best sounding I-V solutions I've ever heard. (far better then a resistor to ground, a transformer or a transistor)
With kind regards,
Bas
With kind regards,
Bas
Attachments
Last edited:
I have faith in the Mr. Selfs ears and skills. As musician and studio engineer I always had a profound love for his good sounding Soundcraft mixingconsole designs. Mr. Self can do magic things with cheap opamps like the NE5532's. Also in the new Cambridge Azur power amplifier he made a incredible input stage with multiple NE5532's paralleled.
Sometimes audiophiles like myself need to read down to earth stuff from Mr Self to put things more in perspective and open our minds. More important, we should try all those things we are so against in audio out ourselves. You can really judge about an NE5534 if u really designed a circuit with it (not just replacing an opamp in an existing circuit)
With kind regards,
Bas
Last edited:
Interesting your experience I did not know about the models TI
I believe it is OPA 627 but very expensive, I prefer the OPA 132. OPA 134 has distortion with load < 2K , not is low impedance as NEs.
Use
I worked as a tech in a recording studio, called in to repair their Neve console. It has dozens of (Philips) NE5534's and dozens of electrolytics/CMOS switches in the signal path. I thought it would sound pretty blah, as in my early audiophile days I knew electrolytics added distortion and I thought the NE5534 was a bit low on slew rate.
Anyhow, while I'm (rush) repairing the console, there was a large choir in for a session and I got to hear the live vocals verses the control room sound. Next session a band comes in and again I get to compare live vs monitors. My jaw dropped, at the detail and transparency I heard coming out of the monitor speakers. The Neve sounded amazing and I concluded that properly applied, the (original) NE5534 sounds pretty good.
The original NE5534's have earned a decades old reputation in the audio industry and I get upset with TI and New Japan Radio 5534's cashing in on that, providing a generic op-amp. Kinda like a 2010 Mustang or Camaro that has little relation to the famed 1969 Mustang/Camaro's.
Anyhow, while I'm (rush) repairing the console, there was a large choir in for a session and I got to hear the live vocals verses the control room sound. Next session a band comes in and again I get to compare live vs monitors. My jaw dropped, at the detail and transparency I heard coming out of the monitor speakers. The Neve sounded amazing and I concluded that properly applied, the (original) NE5534 sounds pretty good.
The original NE5534's have earned a decades old reputation in the audio industry and I get upset with TI and New Japan Radio 5534's cashing in on that, providing a generic op-amp. Kinda like a 2010 Mustang or Camaro that has little relation to the famed 1969 Mustang/Camaro's.
I was involved with Neve's MD in the early 80's in Cambridge UK, where they were/are based.
If you don't know what a mixing desk is, and how responsible it is for MOST of the sound you have on your CDs, please do some real research.
blaming something like an NE5534 for "poor sound" is so juvenile. I guess words fail me!
The whole boutique O-A, C, R scene is such a croc!
EDIT: NOT a criticism of prairiemystic or his post - quite the opposite!
Last edited:
I do not understand this eruption. I even can not find some words in my (rather expensive) dictionary, so please do not write slang (or what do British people call it). Old man, mind you are on an international site!
I think he means "Boutique Op-Amp, Capacitor, Resistor scene". No slang as far as i can see.
OK, thanks. But 'croc'???
I could gess 'crock' but....
I am note sure, but I thought Rubert Neve was the co-inventor of the NE5534. And for the rest, you are right. Neve consoles sound amazing. But I remember Mr. Neve did some clever tricks with the NE5534's also with the pin5
With kind regards,
Bas
Mr. Neve did some clever tricks with the NE5534's also with the pin5
With kind regards,
Bas
Hmm, in Douglas Selfs over 550 pages thick book I can't find any hint to PIN5, different from compensation....
Then download the NE5534 datasheet, study the internal layout of this chip and use your own imagination
The fact that Mr Self doesn't use those tricks doesn't say they don't excist. Look at the NE5534 internal design. You will see that the PIN5 is the direct output of the internal VAS. That opens some possibilities like I mentioned before. You can use the PIN5 directly as output, and omit the class B output stage of the NE5534. The VAS will be mostly in class A. This output sounds far superior, but one must be sure that the current demand of the following stage isn't so big, and one must avoid shortcut's. Second once like also mentioned before one can increase the class A range by adding a current source to pin 5 or simply a resistor from pin5 to V+
with kind regards,
Bas
Last edited:
Bas, I saw your attachment rather late. I have some remarks: The virtual earth of the op amp in question becomes a little bit inductive when frequency rises, so connecting a C across could give instabilities!
http://www.by-rutgers.nl/Pictures/AD826 IVconv Zin.JPG
As You could see on my web site I put a 2 ohm resistor (SMD, directly over the pins) in parallel with the LT1028. Then the input impedance only changes at the high end and never exceeds 2 ohm:
http://www.by-rutgers.nl/Pictures/AD826 IVconv Zin shunt2.JPG
without any instability problems.
I agree that an I/V-converter with an op amp gives the best results, whatever theories could be preached....
Last edited: