Das Löten ist sehr einfach, wenn Sie den OP-AMP vorher mit Sekundenkleber fixieren.
Soldering is very easy if you fix the OP-AMP with superglue beforehand.
Attachments
I don't use any superglue. It's easy to solder. You just need to have the right soldering iron tip and a lot of flux.
I hold it in place with a spring clamp, place a little of smd designed for liquid flux and rapidly place solder in a drop (.2second) then heat for 1 second to melt it on all pins, I wait for it to cool down then clean with copper braid, I finish by a quick swipe with alcohol. It is very quick and never miss.
There are other techniques where you preplace solder, its bad...
Also you can easy overheat if you remove joined pins the wrong way.
Best use a very narrow and thin point solder tip... burnt opamp sound anyone?
There are other techniques where you preplace solder, its bad...
Also you can easy overheat if you remove joined pins the wrong way.
Best use a very narrow and thin point solder tip... burnt opamp sound anyone?
Last edited:
It's not that sensitive to heat.
I soldered some (OPA1656), then desoldered with a hot air blower and resoldered again, and nothing happened to them. If it is soldered too quickly, it can be a bad joint after a while.
I soldered some (OPA1656), then desoldered with a hot air blower and resoldered again, and nothing happened to them. If it is soldered too quickly, it can be a bad joint after a while.
Even if these opamps would be genuine, can one trust these are not the screening remains with worse distortion or noise, have fun but don't take it too seriously.
I don't really know how opamps (and other stuff) are tested in production. Maybe someone knows and will tell us. I don't believe that every piece is tested. It is more likely that only a certain number of pieces from a lot are tested (a random sample). Based on that, whole batches are probably discarded, which can later be found on ebay. Among the specimens from the rejected series, most are probably completely correct.
I received one piece of 100k Dale RN55D resistor that has about 80k, bought from Mouser. It is the first time in 4 decades that I have found a new resistor with a fault.
I received one piece of 100k Dale RN55D resistor that has about 80k, bought from Mouser. It is the first time in 4 decades that I have found a new resistor with a fault.
LOL with like 140 db PSRR and some -120 db , a few bad ones at -110 is the least of worries, I am not trying to count atoms, just listen to music haha.
What does PSRR have to do with distortion and noise? Whatever you like to count, I count money as something important, don't waste it away and support second hand counterfeit garbage industry, you should be part of that too!
ahh I thought you said my digikey opamps were manufacturing rejects...
Still for me as long as it sounds good great! I loved the sound of my NE5534 something China.
The DAC is happier with the AD8597 which has a higher slew rate, you can see the 'bits' of information are more accurately converted into voltages.
As for sound for filter and buffering I could not hear a single difference with AD8597 and Chinese NE5534
It did sounded maybe better with OPA134
Still for me as long as it sounds good great! I loved the sound of my NE5534 something China.
The DAC is happier with the AD8597 which has a higher slew rate, you can see the 'bits' of information are more accurately converted into voltages.
As for sound for filter and buffering I could not hear a single difference with AD8597 and Chinese NE5534
It did sounded maybe better with OPA134
There's no reason for either of those.
Add solder to one of the corner pads. Heat up the solder and set the IC down into it. Make sure it's centred properly on the footprint. Then solder the remaining pins. Solder already has flux in it and there's really no need for more.
If you do drown the part in flux, make sure you clean it off after if you want the full performance.
Tom
Hello Franz Shottky
Audiophonics sells exactly the same article. An OPA1611 with two transistors.
https://www.audiophonics.fr/en/opa/opa1611-single-amplified-opa-dip8-unit-p-12490.html
Audiophonics sells exactly the same article. An OPA1611 with two transistors.
https://www.audiophonics.fr/en/opa/opa1611-single-amplified-opa-dip8-unit-p-12490.html
If they leave 200 mA in classA they must have a quiscent current of at least 100 mA.That means 3.6w loss at +- 18 v.
The transistors at the pcb are standard 250 mw but they dont have the PCB area to cool even that.
Sorry but someone has fooled Audiophonics.
The transistors at the pcb are standard 250 mw but they dont have the PCB area to cool even that.
Sorry but someone has fooled Audiophonics.
Also note the "documentation", i.e., the CMRR/PSRR plot that's just grabbed from the OPA1611 data sheet. In other words, the manufacturer of the module didn't bother to measure it. Oohh!!! Such high quality.
Tom
Tom
opa1611 is supposed to be the best, better than 134, ad8597, and 604.
ad797 etc just not as good.(audibly)
ad797 etc just not as good.(audibly)
I just swapped it tonight... as the filter stage replacing opa134... it is a major difference.
It has a different presentation, the bass is maybe a little electronic sounding, however the voices have incredible airiness and delicacy, with opa134 it sounded a little harsh with more 'layered mid-range'. The opa1611 is something special. It reminds me the ad797.
a great feature of the opa1611 is that the sound is homogeneous, it has a constant sound signature in all registers.
I looked at it with a magnifier and there are many anti-copy features.
I'll hook up directly my headphones on it, the output is 100ohm impedance, should be alright.
It has a different presentation, the bass is maybe a little electronic sounding, however the voices have incredible airiness and delicacy, with opa134 it sounded a little harsh with more 'layered mid-range'. The opa1611 is something special. It reminds me the ad797.
a great feature of the opa1611 is that the sound is homogeneous, it has a constant sound signature in all registers.
I looked at it with a magnifier and there are many anti-copy features.
I'll hook up directly my headphones on it, the output is 100ohm impedance, should be alright.
Last edited:
The opa1611 has a very spooky sound in solo voices...
It is amazing at exposing thrills in music voices as well as flutes... in complex ensemble.
Frank, you don't need any transistor after, it is an insult to the 'perfection' of that 120db gain opamp 🙂
It is amazing at exposing thrills in music voices as well as flutes... in complex ensemble.
Frank, you don't need any transistor after, it is an insult to the 'perfection' of that 120db gain opamp 🙂
.. there is a good downside to the opa1611 vs opa134... as output, the opa1611 generates infrasonic more accurately with more emphasis, it will not smooth out anything, which can be excellent for complex classical. On soft music it could work, but on 'dance' electro , etc, many songs will take a sharper turn and cause listening fatigue. For this I prefer opa134, opa1611 is just too much especially on headphones... a tube amp can smooth things a lot. The beat is better on opa134.
I am listening to Crazy Rhythm of Lionel Hampton, (verve reissu)... I can hear distinctly the 'tape' noise or whatever it is, sounds like I am there, hear all the room reflections, the close mic of the marimba and sax,
The opa134 will not give you that much presence , the tape noise will somewhat lost in background, I don't know which I prefer, maybe 1611 for this one but the room reflections are harsh combined with tape noise.
I am listening to Crazy Rhythm of Lionel Hampton, (verve reissu)... I can hear distinctly the 'tape' noise or whatever it is, sounds like I am there, hear all the room reflections, the close mic of the marimba and sax,
The opa134 will not give you that much presence , the tape noise will somewhat lost in background, I don't know which I prefer, maybe 1611 for this one but the room reflections are harsh combined with tape noise.
Last edited:
If someone is a sound engineer and wants to hear every THD in violins, Tape mishaps, when the tracking is loosing.
All the defects of a recording jumps at me with the 1611... I hear all the knobs turning, it is not good. The opa134 will not mask it, but it will blend in the sound.
All the defects of a recording jumps at me with the 1611... I hear all the knobs turning, it is not good. The opa134 will not mask it, but it will blend in the sound.