So what frequencies did TI say applied to the crosstalk and PSRR numbers you supplied?
My point has been the two figures you posted are meaningless without frequencies. You agreed ( in post #15, 'True') but then deflected. If you prefer to post numbers that are meaningless by your own admission then that's fine by me but it does rather look like trolling from here.
Anyone with any intelligence knows what I was talking about. More so that PSSR varies over a given frequency range, but it's a moot point considering you were just playing childish mind games.....because you already knew the answer.....see how your posts look like trolling.........because some of these older op-amps like the NE5532 don't necessarily have detailed specifications or datasheets.....because you already knew this right ?
I could have used a modern op-amp example of course and that would have made your entire argument completely pointless and unnecessary.
This unnamed device you have could be a mediocre tube-opamp hybrid preamplifier design with, for example, lack of any HF/RF filtering, way too high gain tube stage (standard issue) and mediocre decoupling. If you can show what device it is pictures will tell more than 1000 words. Maybe it is too easy to blame it on the opamps. Well, I am almost sure it is.
It is becoming normal that people ask specific questions but don't even give the name, type of the device in question, schematics or even 1 picture. Bad fashion I think as the environment and circuit are part of the equation. This thread is also in the wrong section.
Oh and OPA1642 is a nice one to try. Don't say you don't want SMD as that was also not mentioned. In fact the best opamps today are often SMD only. Even with adaptor to DIL8 they will outperform many DIL8 opamps.
Last edited:
The harmonic structures are different. Also, opamp datasheet distortion is likely measured in such a way so as to make the numbers look good. Datasheets are marketing tools used by companies trying to sell stuff to engineers. Don't expect them to tell you how to measure what's wrong with a product, especially if they are hoping you won't notice and or hoping it won't matter for your application (remember some of the non-datasheet opamp data compiled in 'Art of Engineering').
Last edited:
What else did you expect?
Acolytes always agree with each other by definition, or they wouldn´t be there to begin with.
"Acolytes,
noun,
plural noun: acolytes.....a person assisting a priest in a religious service or procession."
I understand that English is probably not your first language, but this is a very inapt word to use to describe a group of individually minded experienced people. Why you would attempt to use it in support a non existent argument I do not know. People you know may blindly agree with you, but that's your circle, not mine.
You would be surprised 😉
In any case, please don´t crop Dictionary definitions just to serve your cause, the full definition is:
So definition fits like a glove.
Even the religious definition applies by analogy, meaning "group of like minded individuals" , in this case "like minded" being an understatement.
Not starting any argument, just qualifying presumed "confirmation" origin and credibility.
So.
If you have used dictionaries before you will be well aware, that like views on op amps, many abound, each with their own take on something. I quoted the first I came upon.
Other than perpetuating an argument about which you can know nothing, (because you do not and cannot know who passed their opinion), what's your point of relevance to op amps?
I have no not need to continue a pointless conversation. I hope that all are happy with their views. I am with mine.
Good luck to all.
Is that quote from Mark's post?
Likely? That means you aren't sure. OK.
Just like sound quality claims are marketing tools used by companies trying to sell stuff to consumers. Yeah, don't expect them to tell you how the listening test was conducted, especially if they are hoping you won't question it and just believe those claims (safety by number, right?).