like OPA2132 vs OPA617(x2)
are the specs so much "better" on the more expensive ones? is it the construction?
Thank you.
edit: I'm guessing supply and demand factor as well. (I'm guessing the cheaper ones are produced in bigger quantities?)
are the specs so much "better" on the more expensive ones? is it the construction?
Thank you.
edit: I'm guessing supply and demand factor as well. (I'm guessing the cheaper ones are produced in bigger quantities?)
Last edited:
OPA2132 = Audio
OPA627 = Precision
Offset voltage
OPA2132 = 500uV
OPA627 = 100uV
Offset Drift
OPA2132 = 2uV to 10uV /per degrees C
OPA627 = 0.4uV/per degrees C
Settling Time
OPA2132 = 1uS
OPA627 = 550nS
My understanding is the OPA627 requires manual trimming during the manufacturing process hence the greater price difference over the OPA2132.
OPA627 = Precision
Offset voltage
OPA2132 = 500uV
OPA627 = 100uV
Offset Drift
OPA2132 = 2uV to 10uV /per degrees C
OPA627 = 0.4uV/per degrees C
Settling Time
OPA2132 = 1uS
OPA627 = 550nS
My understanding is the OPA627 requires manual trimming during the manufacturing process hence the greater price difference over the OPA2132.
I guess it's a combination of trimming (if any), chip area, technology, production test (time-consuming performance tests with precision equipment needed or just some quick tests?) and packaging, like for any other IC.
some opamps need large compensation on-chip caps increasing area / cost. also for low offset large input structures and doubled up input transistors for optimal symmetry are needed. so mostly chip area is the driving factor plus the number of masks needed for the particular process. extra masks for high voltage transistors isolation diffusions etc
These two are very different op-amps.LM6172 is not for audio although it can be used as such and generally, there's no real demand for any of them at the moment as none of them are favoured for mass production in audio or RF .
Market is driven by competition.
Manufacturer X feels compelled to make a device with better specs than competing products.
What the device actually sounds like doesn't matter to them as it is the spec that seduces buyers. (& we fall for them in many cases).
I doubt many can actually tell if they are listening to a NE5534, an TLE2071, OPA134, or any of the latest opamps in real world auditioning.
Manufacturer X feels compelled to make a device with better specs than competing products.
What the device actually sounds like doesn't matter to them as it is the spec that seduces buyers. (& we fall for them in many cases).
I doubt many can actually tell if they are listening to a NE5534, an TLE2071, OPA134, or any of the latest opamps in real world auditioning.
A lot of members have built the M2x amplifier whose PCBs are sold by the diyAudio store. Quite a few of these folks have experimented with the "IPS7" input stage for M2x, shown below. IPS7 includes a DIP-8 socket for single opamps (one amp per package, such as TL071, LT1122, OPA604) and a second DIP-8 socket for dual opamps (two amps per package, such as LM833, OPA2134, NE5532). This lets DIYers experiment with, and listen to, either flavor of opamp: singles and/or duals. Some opamp types are available as both singles and duals, but quite a few others are only available as singles (e.g. LT1122) or as duals (e.g. LM833). IPS7 lets you listen to either. Or both.
Members who have built M2x + IPS7 have tried "opamp rolling" with quite a variety of different opamps. Their listening evaluations almost always produced a favorite; one opamp whose sound was preferable to all the others. In other words, the opamps didn't all sound the same. Some people preferred the OPA134 most; others preferred the LT1122; others went for the LME49710; and others preferred Burson discrete opamps in a DIP-8 footprint. They didn't all sound the same.
_
Members who have built M2x + IPS7 have tried "opamp rolling" with quite a variety of different opamps. Their listening evaluations almost always produced a favorite; one opamp whose sound was preferable to all the others. In other words, the opamps didn't all sound the same. Some people preferred the OPA134 most; others preferred the LT1122; others went for the LME49710; and others preferred Burson discrete opamps in a DIP-8 footprint. They didn't all sound the same.
_
Attachments
True, both.
During the years I was buying electronic components I observed dramatic consolidation of the market, both by semiconductor companies buying each other and also distributors merging. This has dramatically affected competition. Also, companies are trying to cash each crisis, whether justified or not.
During the years I was buying electronic components I observed dramatic consolidation of the market, both by semiconductor companies buying each other and also distributors merging. This has dramatically affected competition. Also, companies are trying to cash each crisis, whether justified or not.
As far as I'm concerned, writing "That's why we need competition and observably open, free markets" is exactly as political as writing "That's why we need a communist revolution" or "That's why we need the government to step in instead of leaving everything to the market", but I'm no moderator anyway, so my opinion is irrelevant.
So they are colouring the sound or they'd all sound the same.
Probably they do had the tests been done double blind.
Well, it wasn't intended that way. I'm aware of forum rules. My view is that markets are natural, need to be open and free, but regulated to ensure that they're fair. Monopolies aren't a good thing as they're almost always inefficient, and expensive and often lead to shortage of supply and lack of choice.
That's more economics than politics IMO, but those are my last words on the matter...