No as far as I know, sorry! Unfortunately at Browndog they don't seem to have noticed these chips (OPA1611/1612) yet. Why not solder it for yourself...it's easier and less 'risky' than it seems.
yeah I checked there and also Auzentech but no luck...
maybe I give it a try myself then...
ok I'll give you one suggestion that is not too common... but don't laugh until you try it because it cost so little and is a few years old.
NJM 2122 ... but careful the supply has to be max +/- 10V and careful on what load you present to it don't go below 1k.
I give you a hint on why it sounds good... single-end output not the usual push pull output stages in 99.99% of op amps... look at the diagram.
cheers
paba
maybe I give it a try myself then...
ok I'll give you one suggestion that is not too common... but don't laugh until you try it because it cost so little and is a few years old.
NJM 2122 ... but careful the supply has to be max +/- 10V and careful on what load you present to it don't go below 1k.
I give you a hint on why it sounds good... single-end output not the usual push pull output stages in 99.99% of op amps... look at the diagram.
cheers
paba
An interesting device 🙂 but obviously intended for very specific applications.
It appears to be unsuitable for low gain applications and must not be used as a voltage follower (buffer).
This is interesting, I'll have a look at that NJM2122 datasheet if I can find it. The LT1057 (single: LT1056) being another FET opamp with single-ended output stage, that sounds really musical as a consequence.
However, I'll suggest that the LME49723 is a great low voltage (or not so low) opamp. 🙂 It sounded really excellent at 12V, better than its pricier siblings. 😉
Thanks, but had already found it.
Well... 3.6uA of bias current... certainly for very specific applications...
I'd say try the LT1057 (with its FET inputs and no limitations of max supply voltage), or the Intersil CA3140 (MosFET inputs and claimed to be musically good - still have to try it though I have a couple; only good for low output loading applications though).
Thanks for mentioning LT1057, I will look into it?
just curious has anyone played with the LM6172? I read in another forum some folks like it , except it is tricky because it is so fast.
/paba
just curious has anyone played with the LM6172? I read in another forum some folks like it , except it is tricky because it is so fast.
/paba
LM6172, surely... Cold, thin... I've read that its input stage would be class-B...
LT1057ACN8, give it a try!
LT1057ACN8, give it a try!
It's not class B, it's class AB, and it's probably biased to operate in class A under all conditions. LT1357, LT1363 etc also have a class AB input stage. Again, we tend to disagree. I don't find LM6171 cold and thin. I think it's on the warm side but in an artificial yet pleasant way. I like to balance the thin sound of eg LM4562 with it, but it doesn't have the radiance of OPA627 or OPA2132.
LM6172 isn't as cranky as it's rumour, but the bias currents are exceptionally high and has to be dealt with. If normal care is taken with decoupling caps in close proximity to the power pins etc, it's quite unproblematic.
The LM6171 sounds a little different and better, as I recall.
The LM6172 is really very sterile (color wise
), and (if not necessarily "thin") kind of surgical (without being all that detailed, compared to the audio opamps of the last generation).
Last edited:
Thin sound of LM4562? Hmm. Has any tried the related LM1875 as a small class-A op amp? It would probably drive headphones. Stability does require some gain (range 15-45, conservatively). Thin sound is unlikely.
And, I'm generally curious if anyone has tried a biggie opamp (high current model) for a little op amp job.
Hi fastvideo,
Understand that you had tried the OPA1642 but find that you do not like it. Kindly advise what you do not like about it and when compared to which other op amps as there is ZERO review or comments when googled for them.
You are probably aware from the thread that I had replaced the NJM353s in the pre-amp of my 4 channel car amplifiers and found worsen SQ with reduced volume, loss of details especially the highs and very slow presentation.
Would wish to decide on OPA2107 or OPA1642 which Andrea recommend strongly with indeed very compatible and improved parameters to the NJM353.
Looking forward to your sharing.
Regards,
Richard
Understand that you had tried the OPA1642 but find that you do not like it. Kindly advise what you do not like about it and when compared to which other op amps as there is ZERO review or comments when googled for them.
You are probably aware from the thread that I had replaced the NJM353s in the pre-amp of my 4 channel car amplifiers and found worsen SQ with reduced volume, loss of details especially the highs and very slow presentation.
Would wish to decide on OPA2107 or OPA1642 which Andrea recommend strongly with indeed very compatible and improved parameters to the NJM353.
Looking forward to your sharing.
Regards,
Richard
He did "not" like it because he'd gotten used to the OPA1611 (as I understand it)...
It's well known that all the rest being about equal, bipolar opamps will sound better (and distort less) than FET input's. But the NJM353 is FET and probably you'll be better off with the OPA1642 (which still looks superior to OPA2604 and all the rest of the FET things, excepting maybe the ADA4627-1) than with the OPA1612.
It's well known that all the rest being about equal, bipolar opamps will sound better (and distort less) than FET input's. But the NJM353 is FET and probably you'll be better off with the OPA1642 (which still looks superior to OPA2604 and all the rest of the FET things, excepting maybe the ADA4627-1) than with the OPA1612.
Yes, LM4562 sounds thin. Indeed it does. Most opamps do, not all though. I don't know if it has to do with the distribution of harmonics - almost only odd order and "no" second. I've never heard any of those supposed-to-sound-good power chipamps, but I doubt they can beat the best opamps.
Hi Andreas,
Thanks again.
Looking at OP1642 the GBW is 11MHz which is the only key concern exclude that it is SMT and requires adaptor in my case. After the expensive dual OPA627 failure with only notable concern input current spec of 14mA which had been mentioned as of insignificant impact but probably its GMW of 16MHz being the concern, I am apprehensive with the 11MHz of OPA1642 and looking at the OPA2107 at GMW of 4.5MHz compared to 4MHz of the original NJM353. However, the other CMRR, Open Loop gain etc. of perhaps some importance (I am only guessing) for the OPA2107 looks inferior compared to even to NJM353 which again made me thinking again ! Any further advice on my concern valid or non-valid would be great.
Regards,
Richard
Thanks again.
Looking at OP1642 the GBW is 11MHz which is the only key concern exclude that it is SMT and requires adaptor in my case. After the expensive dual OPA627 failure with only notable concern input current spec of 14mA which had been mentioned as of insignificant impact but probably its GMW of 16MHz being the concern, I am apprehensive with the 11MHz of OPA1642 and looking at the OPA2107 at GMW of 4.5MHz compared to 4MHz of the original NJM353. However, the other CMRR, Open Loop gain etc. of perhaps some importance (I am only guessing) for the OPA2107 looks inferior compared to even to NJM353 which again made me thinking again ! Any further advice on my concern valid or non-valid would be great.
Regards,
Richard
I don't know, just try I guess... I wouldn't use the OPA2107 due to its mediocre sound quality, at least for my ears. So (were it me) I'd definitely run that little risk 🙂
