In the video from Burning amp 2023 where Wayne presents the Pearl3 he mention the NE5532 (quite sure it was) as an opamp he likes very much.
Not only in Pearl3 but in general.
You may have expected some more "fancy"?
Not only in Pearl3 but in general.
You may have expected some more "fancy"?
No, I don't expect that at all - I'm a big friend of the NE5534 or NE5532 as well as the old TL071 or TL072. And my storage is filled with them for the rest of my life
May I ask which (NE5534/32 or TL072) do you prefer? many of the vintage electronics use TL072, but many people on the internet say the NE5532/34 is in all aspect is an upgrade (except of higher power draw). All other fully discrete or hybrid opamps are much more expensive. The design can have certain limitations as well so it might not be beneficial to use the most exotic and expenisve opamp, so I am very curious about the result of the blind test.
Oh, that's a very difficult question to answer - because the answer is of course purely technical in terms of the intended use. And these two types in particular differ fundamentally from each other on the input and output side. This means that their use is not really completely universal. With active filters, I use the TL more often than the NE ... but please don't be apodictic, it really depends on the intended use and the demands it places on the OP.
If I had to choose the Pearl, I would use the NE5534 in the second stage - basically, an NE5534 is hard to beat when it comes to linear stages. But, the second stage has its own external push-pull output stage ... Oh dear, now it's getting critical - it's totally subjective (without any technical measurements to back it up), but I don't like it in this configuration, let's say as a headphone amplifier, because it could easily be plugged in now (with the appropriate level). So here I have a prejudice - it can only be dispelled by measuring and listening.
But as an engineer, I know very well that the NE will work correctly here and that all conditions speak in favor of its use.
However, I can imagine the TL071 in the Pearl's input stage with a clear conscience. But the little devil in my head whispers some times to me: try a 741. Isn't that mean?!
There is simply no way around extensive measurements if you want to make a technically sound recommendation.
The PCB is ready and a clear recommendation should also be made by the provider.
Wayne Colburn should really commit himself here, he has probably already done so and I may have missed it.
#
My personal favorites are the two OPs and families mentioned.
When I asked about the Pearl III, I don't want to answer the question until I have a lab sample on my desk and have carried out extensive measurements.
But the Pearl III is already fully developed, isn't it?
The only problem (if everything is technically in order and the necessary components have been selected) is (the fact): that it sounds different.
And often the tiny difference is not even audible or noticeable, i.e. you have to make a decision. Basically, we often don't know why we prefer this or that today.
If I had to choose the Pearl, I would use the NE5534 in the second stage - basically, an NE5534 is hard to beat when it comes to linear stages. But, the second stage has its own external push-pull output stage ... Oh dear, now it's getting critical - it's totally subjective (without any technical measurements to back it up), but I don't like it in this configuration, let's say as a headphone amplifier, because it could easily be plugged in now (with the appropriate level). So here I have a prejudice - it can only be dispelled by measuring and listening.
But as an engineer, I know very well that the NE will work correctly here and that all conditions speak in favor of its use.
However, I can imagine the TL071 in the Pearl's input stage with a clear conscience. But the little devil in my head whispers some times to me: try a 741. Isn't that mean?!
There is simply no way around extensive measurements if you want to make a technically sound recommendation.
The PCB is ready and a clear recommendation should also be made by the provider.
Wayne Colburn should really commit himself here, he has probably already done so and I may have missed it.
#
My personal favorites are the two OPs and families mentioned.
When I asked about the Pearl III, I don't want to answer the question until I have a lab sample on my desk and have carried out extensive measurements.
But the Pearl III is already fully developed, isn't it?
The only problem (if everything is technically in order and the necessary components have been selected) is (the fact): that it sounds different.
And often the tiny difference is not even audible or noticeable, i.e. you have to make a decision. Basically, we often don't know why we prefer this or that today.
I've tried the v6 Vivid and the V5 ( standard tall, not the V5i ). Compared with the LME49702
I think I will try the v7s ( Vivid and Classic ) that are just now being released. I might try a couple more.
After that, I'll see... from my experience so far, those sockets are more trouble than worth. They introduce noise and loose connections. I got the opamps on a carrier, not directly mounted to the socket on the board ( to minimize wear and tear on the op amps ). That could be the issue. Perhaps I ought to try mounting them "naked" on the board's socket.
The v6 Vivid sounds very good, but it creates some issues when the circuit powers up ( whistles, noise... ). The v5 seems to be the most reliable in the circuit.
I'm beginning to wonder how worthwhile this is. The basic 49072 is really very good sounding as it is. Although it can be noisy. One of my opamps does have the low level woosh wooosh sound.... you can hear it from 3 feet away from the speaker when the preamp is turned up.
I also seem to have a slight imbalance, a little more gain on the right side. It's something on the board proper, I've discounted everything else, including the op amps. When I plug the P2 everything is right in front of me. But then, the music congeals a little bit. Mind you, the P2 is very good, it's just that the P3 is better at separating the instruments and the voices.
Favorite so far? Well, I think the v6 Vivid was the better of the three... BUT, it is a hassle on the circuit. I was told to keep it on at all times, which sort of solves it.... Right now I've been listening to the 49702. I need to get a batch to make sure I get a pair of quiet ones.
Other than the idiosyncraices of those op amps in the circuit, I can live happily with any of the three.
Until I get the v7s, of course.
Oh, I'm driving a Grado Master 2, 1.0 mV, 47K, no capacitance, medium gain.
Last edited:
The better question is:
which criteria must the operational amplifier fulfill at position 1 and which at position 2 in the entire circuit?
In the end, you take the type that is available in tons on the market and is also the cheapest.
So, what are the specific requirements for the 1st op-amp and what are the specific requirements for the 2nd op-amp?
I would really appreciate an honest answer to this question. Of course, it is clear that Wayne is best placed to answer this question if he likes.
It is a basic technical question.
which criteria must the operational amplifier fulfill at position 1 and which at position 2 in the entire circuit?
In the end, you take the type that is available in tons on the market and is also the cheapest.
So, what are the specific requirements for the 1st op-amp and what are the specific requirements for the 2nd op-amp?
I would really appreciate an honest answer to this question. Of course, it is clear that Wayne is best placed to answer this question if he likes.
It is a basic technical question.
Sorry for the interference, especialy as I haven't built a Pearl 3 so I am not really legitimate here...
Why don't you guys just give OPA1656 a try vs boutique op amps? This OPA has been suggested in the original build...
I have to say I found it in all applications I tried it, admittely NOT the Pearl 3 as I haven't built it (yet?) superior to all OPs I tried... including Vivid and Classic...Sorry. I do of course realise your preference could be different, no prob. Not to mention the beauty of this Pearl 3 is to be able to swap OPAs to adjust "things in the entire system", if it has the need for it...
Speaking of those, I prefered by far Vivid, Classic being TO MY EARS very "70s loundness" like, "nicely distorted to flatter the ear" if your prefer (sorry again, no flame please!) but then that's just me and I won't start a debate. Taste and colours. At least you know where I come from "sound taste wise" when I say I do like the OPA1656 (as already posted in this forum, search function is your friend). For me Classic doesn't really deserve its name, whereas V6 Vivid is in fact nearly spot on (I would call that one Classic as quite neutral!) and TBH if the OPA1656 wouldn't have been released, then to my ears it could indeed have been a contender for pole position re Op amps with FET (and similar) input (this can be useful on some applications and less so elsewhere, as ever). So if one day a V7 is released then it could change things again, who knows, everything is open...
I am out as I haven't build that very tempting Pearl 3, so don't want to interfer without any legitimity here re endless OPA discussions - just outlining that the beauty of this somewhat complex built (complex to me vs Pearl 2 with its passive RIAA equalization "in the middle) - but noneless masterfully designed taking that complexity into account as ever here- is that OPAs can be swapped soooo easily to accomodate your system and listening preferences!
Just to say don't discard IMHO the modern cheap offering... they are IME worth a try "usualy".
Have fun guys, this is a nice project and a nice gift!
Claude (can't wait to see MJ's OPA blindtest results)
Why don't you guys just give OPA1656 a try vs boutique op amps? This OPA has been suggested in the original build...
I have to say I found it in all applications I tried it, admittely NOT the Pearl 3 as I haven't built it (yet?) superior to all OPs I tried... including Vivid and Classic...Sorry. I do of course realise your preference could be different, no prob. Not to mention the beauty of this Pearl 3 is to be able to swap OPAs to adjust "things in the entire system", if it has the need for it...
Speaking of those, I prefered by far Vivid, Classic being TO MY EARS very "70s loundness" like, "nicely distorted to flatter the ear" if your prefer (sorry again, no flame please!) but then that's just me and I won't start a debate. Taste and colours. At least you know where I come from "sound taste wise" when I say I do like the OPA1656 (as already posted in this forum, search function is your friend). For me Classic doesn't really deserve its name, whereas V6 Vivid is in fact nearly spot on (I would call that one Classic as quite neutral!) and TBH if the OPA1656 wouldn't have been released, then to my ears it could indeed have been a contender for pole position re Op amps with FET (and similar) input (this can be useful on some applications and less so elsewhere, as ever). So if one day a V7 is released then it could change things again, who knows, everything is open...
I am out as I haven't build that very tempting Pearl 3, so don't want to interfer without any legitimity here re endless OPA discussions - just outlining that the beauty of this somewhat complex built (complex to me vs Pearl 2 with its passive RIAA equalization "in the middle) - but noneless masterfully designed taking that complexity into account as ever here- is that OPAs can be swapped soooo easily to accomodate your system and listening preferences!
Just to say don't discard IMHO the modern cheap offering... they are IME worth a try "usualy".
Have fun guys, this is a nice project and a nice gift!
Claude (can't wait to see MJ's OPA blindtest results)
Hello Claude,
hello PEARL 3 - builders,
I fully agree with Claudes findings / impressions about the TI OPA1656. This is an excellent OpAmp at a
very affordable price. This shouldn't hold you back to test other and more expensive ones.
I will test in the next few days my second PEARL 3 - pcb specially made for single OpAmps. I have a quad of
TI OPA 827 and a quad of LT 1115 (check datasheet and phono pre-schematic there - first stage biased to classA!).
https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/lt1115fa.pdf
The last few days I added some extra shielding to the transformers in the dual mono-psus.
And I would strongly recommend to build the PEARL 3 as described by Wayne Colburn and the BOM.
Later you can test other crazy parts and do experiments...
Have fun with your PEARL 3-phono pres! Enjoy the fantastic sound... 👂🎼
Cheers
Dirk
hello PEARL 3 - builders,
I fully agree with Claudes findings / impressions about the TI OPA1656. This is an excellent OpAmp at a
very affordable price. This shouldn't hold you back to test other and more expensive ones.
I will test in the next few days my second PEARL 3 - pcb specially made for single OpAmps. I have a quad of
TI OPA 827 and a quad of LT 1115 (check datasheet and phono pre-schematic there - first stage biased to classA!).
https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/lt1115fa.pdf
The last few days I added some extra shielding to the transformers in the dual mono-psus.
And I would strongly recommend to build the PEARL 3 as described by Wayne Colburn and the BOM.
Later you can test other crazy parts and do experiments...
Have fun with your PEARL 3-phono pres! Enjoy the fantastic sound... 👂🎼
Cheers
Dirk
Attachments
You are a relentless builder, Dirk, congrats!
Several Pearl 3, and such quality in your builds, Hut ab!
Have fun
Claude
Several Pearl 3, and such quality in your builds, Hut ab!
Have fun
Claude
LT1115 seems ot be an interesting animal, for whatever reason it went under my radar.
I haven't tried it, so can't wait to read you on that one!
MFG
Claude
I haven't tried it, so can't wait to read you on that one!
MFG
Claude
I would like to try some SOIC op amps..... but my board has been built with a nice DIP socket and there's no way I can solder SMD (*)
So, anyhow, I would like some device that I can plug into the DIP socket and then just drop in the SOIC into it. Without any kind of soldering... the kind that we use for programming flash...
Will this do?
https://www.amazon.com/Ximimark-Pro...MI1a6IlvLOhAMVsjetBh0TxQ83EAQYBCABEgJ3rvD_BwE
(*) BTW, that P3 circuit board.... that's gotta be a biiiiitch to solder, huh? That's why I had someone with a FAR steadier hand and better eye than me do them. I thought I was getting into the groove with BA23 then Wayne dropped this beauty on us. Nice board, I need 20/20 to see it.
So, anyhow, I would like some device that I can plug into the DIP socket and then just drop in the SOIC into it. Without any kind of soldering... the kind that we use for programming flash...
Will this do?
https://www.amazon.com/Ximimark-Pro...MI1a6IlvLOhAMVsjetBh0TxQ83EAQYBCABEgJ3rvD_BwE
(*) BTW, that P3 circuit board.... that's gotta be a biiiiitch to solder, huh? That's why I had someone with a FAR steadier hand and better eye than me do them. I thought I was getting into the groove with BA23 then Wayne dropped this beauty on us. Nice board, I need 20/20 to see it.
Last edited:
^
As I noted, I couldn't solder that if my live depended on it. I've never done SMD soldering...
Hence, my looking for something that doesn't require soldering.
I've used those flash "insert" adapter forever, and that I can do quite well.
As I noted, I couldn't solder that if my live depended on it. I've never done SMD soldering...
Hence, my looking for something that doesn't require soldering.
I've used those flash "insert" adapter forever, and that I can do quite well.
Pearl 3 kits back in stock.
https://diyaudiostore.com/collectio...front-end/products/pearl-3-phono-preamplifier
We’ll see how long this batch lasts…
https://diyaudiostore.com/collectio...front-end/products/pearl-3-phono-preamplifier
We’ll see how long this batch lasts…
Got one too! Thanks to all who work so hard to make this possible for others to enjoy.
I got one, wooo hooo! As Audiobear said, many thanks to all who have made this happen!
Can anyone confirm if there's any advantage to using independent power supplies for each channel on the Pearl 3? I was able to get a kit in the previous round and acquired 2 sets of power supply completion kits from Randy. I also just received the Modushop chassis, so I'm ready to build. My question is, should I seek out a second power supply board and go the dual mono PS route, or stick with a single PS board and perhaps build a second Pearl 3 down the road? I've seen a couple posts on this, however, not much in terms of outcomes or comparisons. The Pearl 3 build is gonna be for "me ma" as I do not own a turntable, but she's been a fan of records since the late 1960's and I'm going to hook her up with this great diy setup so she can blast Zeppelin, Jethro Tull, and the Moody Blues into her 80's.
Thanks in advance for any advice.
Thanks in advance for any advice.