Got my main Pearl 3 kit this afternoon. Only shipping effect is two bent pins on one of the ic's. I'd say there's an 80-95% chance they'll bend straight without a problem. Thanks to all for the opportunity. I'm sure glad I've built 11 AmyAlice boards to learn a little about surface mount soldering.
Skip
Skip
Can someone direct me as to where can I find the OPA adapters? I expected them to have pluggable legs that would plug into the sockets I have. I was surprised to receive legless OPA1656s!
OPA1656 are not available in DIP8. They fit the SMD pads underneath the socket…
Adaptor - https://www.digikey.com/short/twb8cvt4
Adaptor - https://www.digikey.com/short/twb8cvt4
What a way to destroy fun.
I haven't rolled my P3 yet, but in my Burson Play DAC, I have rolled the v5, v6 Classic and v6 Vivid.. and you can hear the difference.
Fantastic offer, Mark! Hope you get lots of takers. Should be really interesting. Wish I was building & playing ...
If you disagree, don’t participate. It’s that simple.
…
Now, if there’s ever going to be a place where making changes will make a real, actual difference, actives are it. Nelson has talked about this for years. Wayne already said that the different op amps had different distortion spectra in Pearl 3, so something is happening.
Mark is offering a chance to do participate in a simple project that would be considered interesting by many people, hopefully some people try it, have some fun, and learn something.
…
Now, if there’s ever going to be a place where making changes will make a real, actual difference, actives are it. Nelson has talked about this for years. Wayne already said that the different op amps had different distortion spectra in Pearl 3, so something is happening.
Mark is offering a chance to do participate in a simple project that would be considered interesting by many people, hopefully some people try it, have some fun, and learn something.
The included opamp, the NJM2068, was chosen for a couple reasons, 1) it was designed for audio, 2) is low-noise, and 3) is available and not particularly expensive. (There were cheaper options that still meet the first 2 criteria, the RC4580 and NE5532 immediately come to mind, but the 2068 was more interesting to me.)
Is it the be-all, end-all, best choice? I have no idea. I do know that it performs wonderfully and is quiet, so as you have to start somewhere, this is a great launching-off point. If you never changed the opamp from the 2068, you will have a truly great phonostage. That I am sure of. Are there better opamp for this job? Perhaps… try some and tell us about it in the thread.
Is it the be-all, end-all, best choice? I have no idea. I do know that it performs wonderfully and is quiet, so as you have to start somewhere, this is a great launching-off point. If you never changed the opamp from the 2068, you will have a truly great phonostage. That I am sure of. Are there better opamp for this job? Perhaps… try some and tell us about it in the thread.
I think any opportunity to learn how our own biases, assumptions and (mis)understandings affect our perception is valuable.
What I've noticed is that what I find pleasing one day may not be the same the next day, for whatever reason, but possibly related to the severity of my tinnitus on a given day, or how clear my sinuses are, or what music is being played, etc. Could be why we have 7 different audio systems in the house, and 22 guitar amps for me to play through.
A test like this is rather scientific (could be double-blind, but that would make some folks even more irritated), yet it still allows for personal preference. The unkown is the actual op amp selected; the known is the listener's preference.
On the other hand, it may be more fiddly and obsessive than some folks want to go through, but as 6L6 has just stated, go with the NJM2068 and you will be extremely happy. Want to experiment? Maybe you will find that your preferred selection is not based on confirmation bias if you participate in a blind comparison (which by the way, is extremely popular and common among audio clubs).
What I've noticed is that what I find pleasing one day may not be the same the next day, for whatever reason, but possibly related to the severity of my tinnitus on a given day, or how clear my sinuses are, or what music is being played, etc. Could be why we have 7 different audio systems in the house, and 22 guitar amps for me to play through.
A test like this is rather scientific (could be double-blind, but that would make some folks even more irritated), yet it still allows for personal preference. The unkown is the actual op amp selected; the known is the listener's preference.
On the other hand, it may be more fiddly and obsessive than some folks want to go through, but as 6L6 has just stated, go with the NJM2068 and you will be extremely happy. Want to experiment? Maybe you will find that your preferred selection is not based on confirmation bias if you participate in a blind comparison (which by the way, is extremely popular and common among audio clubs).
Yeah, but I sense an undercurrent of "all sound the same".... so you can understand my point of view?
And, no, I plan on just testing my Bursons.... perhaps that other discrete you mentioned... sorry, but I had a glass of wine for lunch so I plumb forgot...
OK. Mark, count me in then. My P3 is ready.... even if it makes a "little" bit of noise on the right channel... Besides, I got a truly world class turntable design.... you know... the one that fine "whisky" made... sometimes it amazes me that the Scotts can make such fine things... surrounded by revolutions against the English, the Loch Ness Monster, Whisky and all kinds of internecine Christian civil wars..
Let's add the Op Amp Wars to it.
Thanks.
PS- don't tease me, just send me the Non Plus Ultra Mk II Signature Reference versions...
Last edited:
No, not really.
Again, if you don't want to participate, don't. You've already clearly shown your distain for the process.
4-pin XLR compatible with Neutrik D-series.
All these are listed in the BOM in Randy's build document.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/pearl-3-burning-amp-2023.404054/post-7533872
I have some fundamental problems with blind or double blind, I think @Mark Johnson's method is a beautiful solution, very clever indeed!
I personal think that if same person gets two batches of colored opamps (where the two batches have same opamps but just colored differently) then we will get two different descriptions of the sound from the same opamp in batch 1 and 2. This assuming that all opamps are super-duper audio opamps with very low noise, distortion etc.
Therefor I like the idea that there can be identical opamps in a batch. And therefor extremely important for such a test that the identical opamps in a batch can't be "lured" by the listener. It may not be enough to "just" sand the top and paint it. A test-listener does not want to be "fooled" so will do a lot to try to identify identical opamps in a batch (I would ). <-- how do we ensure that there is no "sample variation" among identical opamps? .....so a test-listener can't claim that this was the reason for the "fooling"? .....here a double blind-test is good where a test-listener needs to listen to same opamp several times without knowing which is which. But this is not possible when the test-listener change opamps by himself.
But an interesting test anyway. And we most assume no "sample variation" among identical opamps.
All this is the reason I have selected the "best" opamp I could find regarding noise / distortion and just use that and solder it into place (smd). I "think" the soldered connection will give me more benefit than the ability to be able to roll opamps and then have a "socket connection" in such a high gain sensitive circuit
I use Iron-Pre as pre and Lazy Singing Bush as power amp and those will the main-contribution for the "sound signature" in my system (my own assumption).
I look forward to the opamp reviews and conclusion when Mark show us the results and I hope many will attend.
Therefor I like the idea that there can be identical opamps in a batch. And therefor extremely important for such a test that the identical opamps in a batch can't be "lured" by the listener. It may not be enough to "just" sand the top and paint it. A test-listener does not want to be "fooled" so will do a lot to try to identify identical opamps in a batch (I would
). <-- how do we ensure that there is no "sample variation" among identical opamps? .....so a test-listener can't claim that this was the reason for the "fooling"? .....here a double blind-test is good where a test-listener needs to listen to same opamp several times without knowing which is which. But this is not possible when the test-listener change opamps by himself.But an interesting test anyway. And we most assume no "sample variation" among identical opamps.
All this is the reason I have selected the "best" opamp I could find regarding noise / distortion and just use that and solder it into place (smd). I "think" the soldered connection will give me more benefit than the ability to be able to roll opamps and then have a "socket connection" in such a high gain sensitive circuit
I use Iron-Pre as pre and Lazy Singing Bush as power amp and those will the main-contribution for the "sound signature" in my system (my own assumption).
I look forward to the opamp reviews and conclusion when Mark show us the results and I hope many will attend.