Thanks very much. So it is LM833P which I liked. To be honest I doubt if I would recognize it again. But any unique features/characteristic of this opamp ? Mind you total noob here.
Best regards and thanks again for the efforts.
Mooly - for trimming look a few milliseconds into the file on the left channel. There is an easy to see double hump waveform. Use that as your reference point. You will have to zoom in on amplitude, the beginning is very soft.
It is difficult to identify the start of the music on some of the files because it starts very soft and the noise floor makes it hard to see. Look for the 1st two humps on the left channel. The reference file is very clean and easy to see the start. Use that to guid you one the start of the others.
It is difficult to identify the start of the music on some of the files because it starts very soft and the noise floor makes it hard to see. Look for the 1st two humps on the left channel. The reference file is very clean and easy to see the start. Use that to guid you one the start of the others.
Thanks very much. So it is LM833P which I liked. To be honest I doubt if I would recognize it again. But any unique features/characteristic of this opamp ? Mind you total noob here.
Best regards and thanks again for the efforts.
The LM883P (it must be that version) uses a quasi complementary output stage (two NPN transistors instead of the usual NPN/PNP pair) which is reputed to have a more musical sound, particularly when used in power amplifiers.
If you could pick it out again, then that would be beginning to look like something really was identifiable
As requested, re shuffled files for new comparison.
Here we go then folks. I hope these meet with your approval
The file 'Megamix' is all 8 (6 opamp, Micromega reference and direct wav) all mixed into one. There is clipping as the level is additive but it should show the audible alignment is good.
New shufled files
RERUN
and the mixed track,
Megamix
Here we go then folks. I hope these meet with your approval
The file 'Megamix' is all 8 (6 opamp, Micromega reference and direct wav) all mixed into one. There is clipping as the level is additive but it should show the audible alignment is good.
New shufled files
RERUN
and the mixed track,
Megamix
So the same recordings of the same 390R loadings ?.Here we go then folks. I hope these meet with your approval
If so, what's the point ?.
I can't do it tonight but I am prepared to subjectively identify/preference order the files in a couple of days...Friday night.
This will be on another system (my dad's) and I'll let you know what we find....be prepared for his comments !.
Dan.
Yes, the same original .wav project files, all have been renamed and shuffled and hopefully trimmed a little more accurately so that they stand abx scrutiny (timing wise) better.
The point... well some expressed an interest in having another go, and it would be great if you could identify the distortion you heard on the original listings.
No rush, no real time limit.
The point... well some expressed an interest in having another go, and it would be great if you could identify the distortion you heard on the original listings.
No rush, no real time limit.
Ok, all good.
My Pa and I will listen and compare notes on very old but very good BBC design Radford monitors with Pioneer A400.
Be prepared for possibly caustic comments from a well experienced and well seasoned broadcast designer...Elan Audio Manufacturers and Distributors of Professional Broadcast Equipment
I did say my initial comments were on laptop speakers (1" FR)....more proper speakers, four ears and two minds/mouths will tell you more.
Regards, Dan.
PS. do you have time to repeat your loop-back test with more realistic loads like say, 3K instead of the guaranteed problematic 390R ?.
I/we are prepared to run both tests on the night if you can arrange revised loading Dropbox files.
Ultimate millisecond timing of start points is not critical imo.....in audio editor of your choice it is perfectly easy to add say 1000ms of lead in and this might be preferable.
Also perhaps try a different track...eg AC/DC "Livewire" track is a seriously good test track...and/or REM "What's The Frequency Kenneth".
These tracks will show up IMD probs big time when running at decently high power/decently high spl.
On properly decent system/preamp stages these tracks sound big, loud, clean, matter of fact and fun...on lesser systems the likes of these tracks can very easily descend to noise, distortion and irritation.
My Pa and I will listen and compare notes on very old but very good BBC design Radford monitors with Pioneer A400.
Be prepared for possibly caustic comments from a well experienced and well seasoned broadcast designer...Elan Audio Manufacturers and Distributors of Professional Broadcast Equipment
I did say my initial comments were on laptop speakers (1" FR)....more proper speakers, four ears and two minds/mouths will tell you more.
Regards, Dan.
PS. do you have time to repeat your loop-back test with more realistic loads like say, 3K instead of the guaranteed problematic 390R ?.
I/we are prepared to run both tests on the night if you can arrange revised loading Dropbox files.
Ultimate millisecond timing of start points is not critical imo.....in audio editor of your choice it is perfectly easy to add say 1000ms of lead in and this might be preferable.
Also perhaps try a different track...eg AC/DC "Livewire" track is a seriously good test track...and/or REM "What's The Frequency Kenneth".
These tracks will show up IMD probs big time when running at decently high power/decently high spl.
On properly decent system/preamp stages these tracks sound big, loud, clean, matter of fact and fun...on lesser systems the likes of these tracks can very easily descend to noise, distortion and irritation.
Hi Dan,
See how you get on with these first. Having two pair of ears (you and your dad) might throw some useful data up.
Time is the big problem in doing all these kind of tests, not just building the circuit up but then creating all the files one after the other so that absolutely nothing but the device under test changes.
See how you get on with these first. Having two pair of ears (you and your dad) might throw some useful data up.
Time is the big problem in doing all these kind of tests, not just building the circuit up but then creating all the files one after the other so that absolutely nothing but the device under test changes.
Yeah, we will take a listen over a few Vitamin B's...Vic Bitter
Sure, repeatability is mission critical.
In time I will have a set of listening tests for you also
.Dan.
I totally missed the big reveal a few pages back. The results are very interesting to me. I certainly have no more reservations about using TL072 units in my EQ now, Mooly.
I must say, the bickering in this thread has soured it for me. People need to learn to just move along and not participate if the conditions of the "test" are not favourable to them.
I must say, the bickering in this thread has soured it for me. People need to learn to just move along and not participate if the conditions of the "test" are not favourable to them.
TL072 are load sensitive and Mooly's listening test reveals this characteristic.
Keep the loading low and TL072 are very fine opamps.
Dan.
Yeah, we will take a listen over a few Vitamin B's...Vic Bitter
Sure, repeatability is mission critical.
In time I will have a set of listening tests for you also
Dan.
Lol
This is the one to try, even a 741 sounds supreme with a glass of this in one hand.
Always interesting to try other listening tests... some of Pavels were quite good.
I have always found I had good results from the TL0 series. While the loading in this test seems severe, you have to bear in mind the levels are relatively low meaning that the device never comes close to its maximum current delivery. 2000 ohms is often quoted as a minimum impedance for the TL0 series but remember that is for levels of around 10 volts rms. The 5532 and similar manage that into 600 ohms.
If we look at peak voltages, then 10 volts rms is 14 volts peak. 14 volts peak draws 7ma with a 2000 ohm load. Now look at the buffer situation. The maximum nominal level from CD is 2 volts RMS and that equates to 2.82 volts peak. 2.82 volts peak across 390 ohms (our test loading) draws 7ma. The same.
Lol, that goes with the territory I'm afraid
Lol
This is the one to try, even a 741 sounds supreme with a glass of this in one hand.
Sounds excellent. However I have learned through experience that such beers are second to none at providing a pounding headache after just a few.
Must admit I'm not really a drinker but of glass of the McEwans goes down nicely at lunchtimes
If you drink that at lunchtime, you are a drinker!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.