I am looking for appropriate OP-Amp type to get a sonic character like phono-preamp model like EAR834 or similar
I have heard, that OP-Amp IC types like follow are good therefore, because one will get sound like tubeamps:
1) AD817 (used in SLEE from Graham) - go to
Vinyl Asylum
2) AD746 = dual version AD744 (used in replacement phono unit from Rowland's C1) - go to post #92 under
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/soli...-coherence-1-schematic-modules-wanted-10.html
3) AD829 - discrete Version of that internal circuit you will find here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/62998-lyra-connoisseur-4-2l-se-what-masterpiece.html
4) OPA604/2604 (only one gain stage created with folded cascode)
Who can give me advices for more OPA types, which sounded similar like tube ?
Thanks in advance.
This threads don't provide any advices:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/parts/106548-favorite-op-amps-riaa-preamp.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/50530-best-phono-preamp-op-amps.html
I have heard, that OP-Amp IC types like follow are good therefore, because one will get sound like tubeamps:
1) AD817 (used in SLEE from Graham) - go to
Vinyl Asylum
2) AD746 = dual version AD744 (used in replacement phono unit from Rowland's C1) - go to post #92 under
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/soli...-coherence-1-schematic-modules-wanted-10.html
3) AD829 - discrete Version of that internal circuit you will find here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/62998-lyra-connoisseur-4-2l-se-what-masterpiece.html
4) OPA604/2604 (only one gain stage created with folded cascode)
Who can give me advices for more OPA types, which sounded similar like tube ?
Thanks in advance.
This threads don't provide any advices:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/parts/106548-favorite-op-amps-riaa-preamp.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/50530-best-phono-preamp-op-amps.html
Last edited:
What I see is that for many designers, sound quality is equal to low distortion and they do not even take the trouble of listening to their design.
But Audio is all about listening. Measuring can give a useful support to detect any design flaws, but it is not conclusive.
There is hardly a Cart on the market producing less than 1% distortion, but their sound differs quite a lot between them.
So do you really need a 0.00001% distortion Amp to play the signal from a Cart with 1% distortion?
I don't think so.
Do different OPA's have a different sound signature, although their distortion figures are ridiculously low, yes they do.
So when your design has been finished, try different OPA's who's specs fit within your design.
The 5534 is a great performer in many respects, but I was never charmed by the sound of it.
Hans
But Audio is all about listening. Measuring can give a useful support to detect any design flaws, but it is not conclusive.
There is hardly a Cart on the market producing less than 1% distortion, but their sound differs quite a lot between them.
So do you really need a 0.00001% distortion Amp to play the signal from a Cart with 1% distortion?
I don't think so.
Do different OPA's have a different sound signature, although their distortion figures are ridiculously low, yes they do.
So when your design has been finished, try different OPA's who's specs fit within your design.
The 5534 is a great performer in many respects, but I was never charmed by the sound of it.
Hans
If good quality sound reproduction is the aim (which it often is not) then adequately low distortion is certainly necessary, although not sufficient. Good designers know this. Bad designers either get worked up about unnecessarily low distortion or (more commonly these days) ignore distortion and hence ignore sound reproduction.Hans Polak said:
A good measurement can be conclusive about what is being measured. It won't, of course, tell you whether you like the result - especially if sound reproduction is not the aim.
The former is part of the reason for the latter. I would replace "but" with "therefore".
I doubt if anyone else thinks so either. However, saying that we don't need 0.00001% distortion is not an argument for preferring 0.1% distortion when 0.01% is possible without further compromise. Saying that really low distortion is not needed does not mean that higher distortion is better.
If an opamp is doing its job then it would be impossible to be charmed by the sound of it because it has no sound. Any opamp which charms you is thus by definition failing to act as an opamp should act.
"If an opamp is doing its job then it would be impossible to be charmed by the sound of it because it has no sound".
It is exactly this kind of black and white prejudiced thinking that I addressed in my posting.
If things are not white, they can only be black and vice versa.
With an open mind, you will notice there are lots of different colours.
Hans
It is exactly this kind of black and white prejudiced thinking that I addressed in my posting.
If things are not white, they can only be black and vice versa.
With an open mind, you will notice there are lots of different colours.
Hans
I never said things were black and white. However 'charm' is very hard to describe or point a finger at and is to some synonymous with the dull/exiting descriptions some use. I am boring and I want my electronics to get out the way and be neutral to the source. If a component charms me I would interpret that as its adding colouration. Or at least consider that an option to investigate.
Currently (for financial and time reasons) I am using a cheap ebay phono stage that was made c. 1989 using thick film hybrid op-amps. It reviewed poorly at the time due a lack of 'excitement', but I see it as being neutral, albeit with a poor overload margin by most standards. One day I should measure it.
I guess it comes down to 'can neutral be exciting'?
Currently (for financial and time reasons) I am using a cheap ebay phono stage that was made c. 1989 using thick film hybrid op-amps. It reviewed poorly at the time due a lack of 'excitement', but I see it as being neutral, albeit with a poor overload margin by most standards. One day I should measure it.
I guess it comes down to 'can neutral be exciting'?
That's a good point, but it almost implies that the 5534 is neutral and the others are not.
My feeling is that I am not charmed by the 5534 because it isn't that neutral as more modern OPA's.
Stan Curtis, the former head of development of Cambridge Audio recently wrote in an article: Give 3 designers the same circuit diagram of an amp and let them make a PCB for it. The result will be 3 amps sounding differently.
Another test from the New Jersey Audio Society was performed to assess the effect on the sound of and amp by switching between 13 different types of power supplies.
The result was astounding, not 2 were alike and a large difference was noticed between no 1 and no 13 in the ranking.
So can you say that an OPA sounds neutral without taking other parameters into acount ?
What also strikes me is that a well respected magazine Stereophile is mentioning frequently that a component does not add anything, and acts like a wire with gain. Nevertheless the same is said some time later from another component that sounds better than the previous one.
So to conclude, I do not think neutral = boring, but the human ear is so complex that we still have no idea why we can hear differences that cannot be measured, and that we don't care about some distortions that can be very well measured.
Hans
well as I am of the school that the PCB is perhaps the most important component in a finished product I completely agree with Stan.
But you must agree that a lot of people don't think much of amplifiers with 5532/4 in just because they are 5532/4? Despite the fact that much popular music has passed through them. whilst it may be the venerable old girl might not sound as good as the new kids it is possible it is in the mind.
But you must agree that a lot of people don't think much of amplifiers with 5532/4 in just because they are 5532/4? Despite the fact that much popular music has passed through them. whilst it may be the venerable old girl might not sound as good as the new kids it is possible it is in the mind.
Forget it, in the 40 years i tested and listen to a lot of phono preamps and my conclusion is that there is no opamp based phono preamp that sounds like a " tubeamp" . reverse i heard some tubeamps that sound like a opamp phono preamps. But i like to know how you describe tube phono preamp sound. I know for myself why i like the tube preamps.
Since an RIAA phono preamp operates at very low current, it doesn't require huge transformers or the other really expensive parts of a tube amp. So why not just make a tube phono preamp?
I built a version of the RCA tube manual phono preamp a long time ago, using a pcb sold by Handmade Electronics. I added a simple 12AT7 cathode follower after it, so it could be used with the usual 10k input impedance of solid state line amps or receiver inputs. My brother has it now. It sounds quite nice. I've modeled the circuit in LTspice, and the simulation says THD should be quite low, well below 0.1% at 1V RMS output, and completely 2nd harmonic.
Eli Duttman has published an updated version of the RCA design, using a Zetex ZVN0545 source follower on the output, along with a few other tweaks. It uses a cheap 'n cheerful Allied isolation transformer for the HV, which I think costs about $14. Look for "Eli Duttman RCA Redux" and you'll find it. There have been some threads about this recently over in the Tubes section.
--
I built a version of the RCA tube manual phono preamp a long time ago, using a pcb sold by Handmade Electronics. I added a simple 12AT7 cathode follower after it, so it could be used with the usual 10k input impedance of solid state line amps or receiver inputs. My brother has it now. It sounds quite nice. I've modeled the circuit in LTspice, and the simulation says THD should be quite low, well below 0.1% at 1V RMS output, and completely 2nd harmonic.
Eli Duttman has published an updated version of the RCA design, using a Zetex ZVN0545 source follower on the output, along with a few other tweaks. It uses a cheap 'n cheerful Allied isolation transformer for the HV, which I think costs about $14. Look for "Eli Duttman RCA Redux" and you'll find it. There have been some threads about this recently over in the Tubes section.
--
RJM has a brief listening report on the virtues of a discrete JFET vs an opamp-based phono stage here : http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/anal...plifier-development-thread-3.html#post4676522
Can't find at the moment as trying to work out exact search parameters, but it was a Mooly test. Here is a similar one he did a few years before. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/everything-else/246957-small-signal-listening-comparison-test.html sadly like most only a few people will put their head on the block without either bit peeking or waiting until after the answers were given.
EDIT: found it http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...-trying-understand-what-we-think-we-hear.html an interesting test, well until the usual suspect chip-p*55er turned up. I will not comment on the validity or otherwise, just that to me was very interesting.
EDIT: found it http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...-trying-understand-what-we-think-we-hear.html an interesting test, well until the usual suspect chip-p*55er turned up. I will not comment on the validity or otherwise, just that to me was very interesting.
Last edited:
My english isn't so good to describe my impressions in that kind, that you can understand it.
But under
EAR 834P phono preamplifier | Stereophile.com
I read this:
The performance of the EAR 834P phono stage combined the strengths, weaknesses, and colorations of classic high-end tube gear. As one would expect, the EAR thus excelled at re-creating the inner detail of good recordings, and was adept at extracting the delicacy, the subtle nuances of well-recorded unamplified instruments. Along with inner detail came agile reproduction of transients, but without a trace of hardness.
The EAR's greatest strength was its ability to reproduce perfectly placed holographic images with body and life on a wide, deep soundstage. This may be the phono stage for lovers of well-recorded classical works. On Cantate Domino (Proprius 7762) the layered vocals and French horns against the rear of the soundstage were arresting. And the EAR lit up the rear wall and provided a detailed perspective of the recording space unlike any phono stage I've heard. If hall sound and ambience are important to you, you must audition this phono stage.
The 834P's tonal balance was replete with a number of classic "tubey" colorations that many of today's valve designers have been able to abandon. The amplifier's overall dark perspective reflected very laid-back extreme high frequencies and an overly round midbass. There was a slightly euphonic liquid presentation throughout the midrange and upper highs as well.
I have heard the EAR834 in several chains and my sonic impression is a lot like those of Stereophile's listening report in most cases.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.