The LT1028 is one of their few opamps designed specifically for audio. Another is the LT1115, which is worth trying and - I guess - my second overall favorite LT.
Also the LT1677/8 include audio in their applications; and the LT1468/9 datasheets seem to hint to the fact that they could be used for audio very succesfully (for the low distortion even with 600 ohm, low noise, high speed).
Then come the LT1363/4, which are popular as upgrade opamps in audio forums, maybe more popular than they deserve? At least relatively to the LT1028.
Regarding the LT1363, I liked it and definitely I found it to be better sounding than the dual counterpart the LT1364. It's kind of more intense sounding, and also smoother and more transparent.
However, the LT1363 does tend to impose a bit its personality on all the different recordings, both in terms of frequency response and in terms of dominant sonic color (reminds me of the OPA-Sun V2 for the latter thing).
Also, the LT1363 is not so transparent (here I mean resolving, rather than all-round "transparent") as the LT1028 and, secondly, the LT1115.
Last edited:
Yes, I wasn't sure as I have spoke with a few guys that work at Linear Tech and they said they spend most of their time designing for other applications.
So far I am quite impressed with the LT1028, I will have to look up the spec sheet for the LT1115
Will have to look up the spec sheet and read it over.. I need one of those kindles, all the PDF's I read!
I have tried the LT1364 and IIRC, I wasn't too impressed with that one althogh it was many months ago when I had a listen.
I usually like working with single channel units though, so the LT1363's might also be worth reading up on. What are you thoughts on the LT1057, LT1361 and LT1358?
Thnx for the suggestions.
Yup, the LT1364 isn't the end of the world... the LT1363 I do really like though. 🙂
LT1057 - nice, but lacks transparency.
LT1361 - just a slightly worse LT1364; easier to make to work well due to its lower speed, though.
LT1357 (single LT1358) - it's a nice chip, better than the LT1360 (single LT1361) but I'm not sure it's as good as the LT1363. Due to a different dominant tonality (red rather than yellow) though, it might sound more interesting where the LT1363 would sound duller...and vice versa.
Ah, and majkel is right in saying that the various FET-input OPA827, OPA627, OPA2107 don't sound natural. In fact I keep saying all the time that the OPA132UA is the most natural FET opamp BB makes 🙄 and I really like it (probably more than the LT1363 which is kind of similar for tonality).
LT1057 - nice, but lacks transparency.
LT1361 - just a slightly worse LT1364; easier to make to work well due to its lower speed, though.
LT1357 (single LT1358) - it's a nice chip, better than the LT1360 (single LT1361) but I'm not sure it's as good as the LT1363. Due to a different dominant tonality (red rather than yellow) though, it might sound more interesting where the LT1363 would sound duller...and vice versa.
Ah, and majkel is right in saying that the various FET-input OPA827, OPA627, OPA2107 don't sound natural. In fact I keep saying all the time that the OPA132UA is the most natural FET opamp BB makes 🙄 and I really like it (probably more than the LT1363 which is kind of similar for tonality).
It is hard to find opinion regarding LT's as many people seem to go for other opamps and bypass the LT's.
Will have to try out the LT1363.
I also tested out the OPA132UA based on suggestions and they are pretty good.
I find many like BB's because of the color they add not because they are transparent.
You know that common saying laid back "Burr Brown sound" Which is usually meaning the tubby bass and glossed over highs.
Will have to try out the LT1363.
I also tested out the OPA132UA based on suggestions and they are pretty good.
I find many like BB's because of the color they add not because they are transparent.
You know that common saying laid back "Burr Brown sound" Which is usually meaning the tubby bass and glossed over highs.
Well...I don't necessarily want transparency all the time (I hope I'm not so boring 😛), sometimes I consciously prefer the addition of a bit of coloration, but only one that is pleasant to my ears...
But I should specify that I'm talking of coloration in a literal sense, i.e. just the 'visual' kind of coloration, meaning I like certain warm colors superposed on the whole sonic spectrum by this or that opamp (or by audio cables, or other).
As I see it, there are both good/bad opamps that are "colored", according to the pleasantness of this coloration; and good/bad opamps that are "transparent", according to the type of their transparency, because not all transparency feels good to the ear and the heart...
Anyway, between LT1363 and OPA132UA I couldn't tell what is better... both have their +'s and -'s. The LT1363 has a better transient response (e.g. in guitar plucks) and brings out tiny treble details better; on the other hand, the OPA132UA has a 'deeper' sounding midrange, as if it had more insight there, and a more controlled midbass.
No actually. Audio applications alone would not justify any investment in IC's. This thread like many claims certain op-amps "have no bass at all". So what does that mean? A plucked bass chello is 3 or 6 dB down? I stay out of these discussions for good reason.
Look at the stats: 407 replies to the thread, the majority of these are from 2 fellows and the majority of their total forum posts are in this thread!
Last edited:
Look at the stats: 407 replies to the thread, the majority of these are from 2 fellows and the majority of their total forum posts are in this thread!
View attachment 148092
And contrary to what audioman would want to believe in the 27 years that I have known Bob Pease his comments about audiophiles are mostly unprintable.
Bob Pease doesn't need to swear. I wonder what he really thinks of Richard Burwen's pretty extreme audio ideas.
Last edited:
guys, you all build your own designs I guess? so a NJM5532D is all that's required in your opinion?
I know some very much golden ears sound engineers who think that anything else than 5532 is snake oil and pointless..because most records have gone through hundreds of 5532/5534 and that's the way music is meant to be listened to. In their opinion, this chip does it all!! All that you need to hear that is.
Lynx only uses 5532 on their top-of-the-line soundcards, but these are professional working tools..
I know some very much golden ears sound engineers who think that anything else than 5532 is snake oil and pointless..because most records have gone through hundreds of 5532/5534 and that's the way music is meant to be listened to. In their opinion, this chip does it all!! All that you need to hear that is.
Lynx only uses 5532 on their top-of-the-line soundcards, but these are professional working tools..
OTOH Salas I love your simplistic RIAA thread. It's amazimg how good these simple circuits sound. My phono setup is basicly this but differential.