• These commercial threads are for private transactions. diyAudio.com provides these forums for the convenience of our members, but makes no warranty nor assumes any responsibility. We do not vet any members, use of this facility is at your own risk. Customers can post any issues in those threads as long as it is done in a civil manner. All diyAudio rules about conduct apply and will be enforced.

OPA1656: High-Performance CMOS Audio Op Amp

Jump to Latest
InspectorGadget

InspectorGadget

Member
Joined 2020
soekris said:
There are these world wide semiconductor shortages.... I check for critical parts almost every day and stock up when I find parts at the right price.... TI are actually doing better than most....
Click to expand...
except wrt the opa1655 in the sot package. Ive been asking them about it for some time and it never seems to get any closer. Only mentioned in the datasheet near the end in package data that it will eventuate. it was confirmed to be in the works by asking at the Ti help centre, but other than that its like it doesnt exist.
 
diyiggy

diyiggy

Disabled Account
Joined 2019
Hi
I liked the opa1656 but is there an easier opa which has a nice pleasant sound or even better because easier about the layout and decoupling technics ?
I am looking for a dac buffer not for I/V purpose. Maybe something with less bandwidth ?

What Ti has in his portfolio that can do that please : easy to use, soic okay, DC coupled proof.

I am not aware of the new opa since the 1656, many thanks if any tip about that.
 
M

Markw4

Member
Joined 2016
We tried OPA1612, OPA1656, NE5532, and Muses 8920 opamps in Rohm BD34301EKV Evaluation Board (which came with 5532's installed). OPA1656 sounded worst, Muses 8920 sounded best. IMHO the outcome was mostly decided by how the opamps responded to the RF coming out of the dac chip. For the case of AK4499 the preferred opamp might have been different, perhaps due in part to some difference in the particular dac output RF noise. Therefore I would suggest to try and see what opamp you think works best with a particular dac chip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
tomchr

tomchr

Member
Joined 2009
neurochrome.com
Paid Member
I seem to recall that the OPA1642 is newer than the OPA1612. Perhaps it's a further development. Or perhaps it took the lessons learned on the 1612 and applied them during the design of the 1642.

Sometimes the company decides to go from two letters to three in the part number and parts get stuck in the middle. See the LM4562 vs LME49720 for example.

I wouldn't read too much into the numerology. I would read the data sheet, though. :)

Tom
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom