I just recieved one of these-
6Way M62446 LCD Volume Remote Control Preamplifier Kit on eBay (end time 29-Oct-10 02:12:33 BST)
For a bit of fun realy.
It has 3 NE5532 op amps for the 6 channels. Could you guys suggest what I could swap them for to improve the preamp? The ad mentions changing the for JRC4556 op amps for headphone application- dont know why.
Or any other mods I could play with?
Damn cheap isnt it!
6Way M62446 LCD Volume Remote Control Preamplifier Kit on eBay (end time 29-Oct-10 02:12:33 BST)
For a bit of fun realy.
It has 3 NE5532 op amps for the 6 channels. Could you guys suggest what I could swap them for to improve the preamp? The ad mentions changing the for JRC4556 op amps for headphone application- dont know why.
Or any other mods I could play with?
Damn cheap isnt it!
Last edited:
Looks like a good deal, especially for someone building a 6 channel amp for an active system or home theatre.
4556 op amps have higher current/lower impedance output (I think) so would be better suited to drive headphones.
4556 op amps have higher current/lower impedance output (I think) so would be better suited to drive headphones.
Yep, looks like it has tremendous potential for the price. 😀 Probably the grounding will be the weakest point - fixing that would be my first port of call before rolling opamps. I get excellent results from NE5532s but they do need care and attention to layout and decoupling.
Try an NJM2068. Very good sounding and cheap. I use a lot of them. Also swap out those cheap caps for Panasonic FM type.
I think you made a real find and may buy one myself and do exactly as I have suggested. Remote control bargin!
I have no idea why AndrewT does not like Japanese Radio Corp. They make a lot of great stuff like the 2068 and the common ones like the one you mention not sounding as good. Maybe he likes the shrill sounding Analog Devices parts as he did not say the issue. A lot of people do use those shrill opamps by AD and then tell me how great their THD is. True enough but that one measurement certainly does not cover all aspects of performance.
I think you made a real find and may buy one myself and do exactly as I have suggested. Remote control bargin!
I have no idea why AndrewT does not like Japanese Radio Corp. They make a lot of great stuff like the 2068 and the common ones like the one you mention not sounding as good. Maybe he likes the shrill sounding Analog Devices parts as he did not say the issue. A lot of people do use those shrill opamps by AD and then tell me how great their THD is. True enough but that one measurement certainly does not cover all aspects of performance.
Lots of people like the NE5532 as it works but it really does not sound very good. Let me say it this way, if I never hear another it will be to soon. Everything that comes in with a 5532 is replaced by some other part, usually the NJM2068. Many manufacturers have moved to the 2068 from the 5532 as a better choice. Rane, Symmetrix, Garmin (navigation and avionics), Peavey, and the list goes on. Why use a 36 year old design when there is something that works better in every way in real circuits, not test circuits. Is it not time to retire a 36 year old solid state device? What about the old 709 and 741? Anyone not using a modernized version of one of those? That original is long gone or are there still some who do? Where do they purchase those old ones? Obsolete.
What application does it not sound very good in for you? To my ears it sounds fine so long as attention is paid to power supplies, common mode distortion and the like. Samuel Groner's tests don't reveal anything bad about it, given the low price.
Please do explain what makes the NJM2068 better - both technically and sound-wise. Here in China ostensibly its no cheaper than the NE5532 - both are around 1RMB each.
How about make a circuit which can switch between the 5532 and the 2068 using the same circuit in a typical application. Here, several sample circuits are used to listen to opamps in various configurations and switch between several. If you cannot tell the difference then it is clearly not important. To me on my system and in our professional equipment it is the difference between rotting fish and fresh fish. The 2068 has lower drift, less offset, will drive a low Z load better, has complementary instead of quasi comp output stage, and phase response using feedback is much better in real circuits.
Is this enough?
Regards, =SUM
Is this enough?
Regards, =SUM
Sorry about not saying the sound. The 5532 is just plain strange sounding. The bass is very muddy usually with a very "phasey" (like a flanger) sound fuzzy and indistinct. Highest tones sound more like rain on a tin roof than any particular instrument. Mids sound kind of turned inside out coming closer and moving further away constantly. All in all very unsatisfying to me. I prefer the sound of music to be full of life and lively. 5532 definitely sound like the music died.
I will say some have worked with the 5532 a lot and gotten half-way decent sound but never close to the equal of the NJM2068 in any of the hundreds of circuits within my experience. The Cyrus integrated comes to mind as a best 5532 example. That is a much better than average amp/preamp integrated and really is as good as anything 5532 I have heard. But then too have heard so many converted to 2068... wow, a lot better every time, clearly lively, punchy and festive without the strange sound the 5532 is known for.
I mean really, the 5532 was pretty good back in the dark ages of 1975 ICs but these days there are many that are a lot better including the Analog Devices parts widely used and supposedly for audio. The 2068 is better than any of the ADs and in my very short list... top seven best op amps for audio. Also the stability of the 2068 makes it very easy to use.
I will say some have worked with the 5532 a lot and gotten half-way decent sound but never close to the equal of the NJM2068 in any of the hundreds of circuits within my experience. The Cyrus integrated comes to mind as a best 5532 example. That is a much better than average amp/preamp integrated and really is as good as anything 5532 I have heard. But then too have heard so many converted to 2068... wow, a lot better every time, clearly lively, punchy and festive without the strange sound the 5532 is known for.
I mean really, the 5532 was pretty good back in the dark ages of 1975 ICs but these days there are many that are a lot better including the Analog Devices parts widely used and supposedly for audio. The 2068 is better than any of the ADs and in my very short list... top seven best op amps for audio. Also the stability of the 2068 makes it very easy to use.
My guess is you must be doing something seriously wrong - either with topology, power supplies, decoupling and grounding, input filtering or output loading to get such poor quality. I just do not recognise your description of the 5532's sound in any way here. I also prefer my music full of life, and yes its quite possible to get a 5532 in a circuit where it kills the life - that's always in my experience some issue about allowing RF into the IPS. And don't use one as I/V converter, this is also likely to produce dead sound (I think because DACs are strong sources of RF).
So the 2068 bests the AD797? In what respects? I can only think of one - price. Oh, and its more easy to get stable.
As stated have seen a lot of manufacturers switch to the 2068 over the 5532. Maybe yours work better than all of theirs or mine. The 2068 is smooth and clean compared to the shrill almost screeching of the AD797 and the 2068 warms up in minutes to the AD797 weeks. Abraxalito, use what you like of course. With so many having switched to the 2068 over the 5532 to me it is a no brainer.
As for my circuits... no problems as you mention other than the 5532 just sounds bad every time even at its' best and usually not found at its best. I am supposing you are just used to the sound or the sound I (and others) object to is not sound which is recognizable by you. As example at Garmin Navigation they tried the 2068 in products and then deleted the 5532 from inventory saying "the data sheets would have never suggested how much better the 2068 works and sounds even on voice and it cost less."
My guess is your reference system just does not resolve much and your testing does not show the difference. These two things lead to the conclusion the 5532 is good. For you then it would be. Here it is back to the sonic equivalent of the odor of rotting fish always to be avoided.
By the way, the AD797 is not in my list of 7 best sounding op amps.
As for my circuits... no problems as you mention other than the 5532 just sounds bad every time even at its' best and usually not found at its best. I am supposing you are just used to the sound or the sound I (and others) object to is not sound which is recognizable by you. As example at Garmin Navigation they tried the 2068 in products and then deleted the 5532 from inventory saying "the data sheets would have never suggested how much better the 2068 works and sounds even on voice and it cost less."
My guess is your reference system just does not resolve much and your testing does not show the difference. These two things lead to the conclusion the 5532 is good. For you then it would be. Here it is back to the sonic equivalent of the odor of rotting fish always to be avoided.
By the way, the AD797 is not in my list of 7 best sounding op amps.
That is #3 on one of my top 7 lists:
1 - Moves back in with parents at age 32.
2 - Uses words like: "sweet!" or "sup?" or "peace"
3 - Has a top 7 list of favourite sounding opamps
4 - Has nearly 2000 friends on Facebook.
5 - Is Convinced that the government is practicing mind control via James Cameron films.
6 - Loves Bon Jovi - the man and his music.
7 - Was blown away by the television series 'LOST'.
Sup?
Could see from a mile away that this would turn into another this opamp or that opamp "discussion".
Peace.
🙂
Last edited:
Maybe, but then it would not be just mine but those of SSL and Bruno Putzeys too. Doesn't sound too plausible to me.
Your AD797s must sound much worse than various Head-Fi'ers then. Nothing wrong with the chip, implementation of that one is quite tricky by many accounts.
I'm certainly interested in giving the 2068 a run, but it would have to have a sonic advantage over the 5532, which I don't at this stage deny that it may have. Just following others for switching over though doesn't cut any mustard with me.
Unconvincing given the 'shrillness' you attribute to the AD797. That's circuit dependent, not intrinsic to the chip.
Could be, could be. But then its not just my system which has to be unresolving, this has to be true for many others too. Much more plausible that you have a prejudice against opamps you consider to be 'too old' 🙂
I wouldn't expect it to be - seems to me from what you're saying you don't know yet how to implement it properly 😀
The reason there are 7 best op-amps is because only 7 have been found. No magic in 7 in particular. It is not that the 5532 and 5534 are "to old," it is there are much better choices now for similar prices so why use that one even if it came out yesterday?
I agree, statistically most systems 99.99% do not have much in the way of resolution. It is a sad thing and leads to a lot of confusion.
Possibly you cannot implement the 2068 to notice how much better it is than the 5532. Professionally speaking, I sure have fixed a lot of other peoples power supplies for production products and given industrial classes to engineers in power supply layout and design. Certainly I can error just like everyone. As example, here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/chip-amps/163385-so-just-how-good-can-chip-amp-9.html#post2148761 and here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/chip-amps/163385-so-just-how-good-can-chip-amp-9.html#post2149038 is one of mine with test results. Is that bad or suggest poor layout and implementation?
I agree, statistically most systems 99.99% do not have much in the way of resolution. It is a sad thing and leads to a lot of confusion.
Possibly you cannot implement the 2068 to notice how much better it is than the 5532. Professionally speaking, I sure have fixed a lot of other peoples power supplies for production products and given industrial classes to engineers in power supply layout and design. Certainly I can error just like everyone. As example, here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/chip-amps/163385-so-just-how-good-can-chip-amp-9.html#post2148761 and here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/chip-amps/163385-so-just-how-good-can-chip-amp-9.html#post2149038 is one of mine with test results. Is that bad or suggest poor layout and implementation?
I'm not sure who you're 'agreeing' with about 99.99% of systems - certainly not me as I haven't heard everyone's system so I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest that only one system in ten thousand was revealing. Presumably though you're claiming that yours is that one in ten thousand?😉
As regards your links, looks like a chip amp, whereas I was claiming it was your AD797 that was suffering from poor implementation. So the relevance is lost on me.
As regards your links, looks like a chip amp, whereas I was claiming it was your AD797 that was suffering from poor implementation. So the relevance is lost on me.
All, please do not get me wrong. The AD797 is a very good op amp compared to the many op amps out there and would include it in with the 30 or so which are acceptable for audio. The NE5532 and 5534 are not acceptable for audio.
In the audio biz since 1975 and in that time have heard 4 systems with good resolution and clarity out of thousands which were all a big step down from those 4. Definitely a sad situation. Many systems have had bands that were quite good but lack the complete spectrum.
Please also note the NJM2068 is a "drop in" replacement for the 5532 and 5534.
In the audio biz since 1975 and in that time have heard 4 systems with good resolution and clarity out of thousands which were all a big step down from those 4. Definitely a sad situation. Many systems have had bands that were quite good but lack the complete spectrum.
Please also note the NJM2068 is a "drop in" replacement for the 5532 and 5534.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.