I've got TIP42c from Fairchild before On semi bought them. Ft is only 3 mhz, muddy up the highs some when used as VAS or drivers. Would be okay for output emitter follower transistors on 30W amps I suppose. What has cleaner highs as driver in the same circuit (AX6) is MJE15029, with 30 mhz Ft. Top octave solo piano & tinkly bells is where I hear the difference, but I've got 14 khz ear response.
The non-TI one's are slightly lower distortion at HF, the TI ones have the distortion starting to rise a bit more from 5kHz and up IIRC. The effect is measurable with an Analog Precision, according to Doug Self.
The New Japan Radio versions seem to be the nicest (e.g. lowest distortion). This would be the NJM5532D and the selected version NJM5532DD in the DIP-8 package. I think they gave up on the single 5534 version though.
Honestly though, an LM4562 beats the daylights out of a 5532, and is very inexpensive too.
Single ICs to replace a 5534 will be tougher to find now. The only time singles get made now are when the idle dissipation for one amplifier is on the high side, making a dual harder to use.
Honestly though, an LM4562 beats the daylights out of a 5532, and is very inexpensive too.
Single ICs to replace a 5534 will be tougher to find now. The only time singles get made now are when the idle dissipation for one amplifier is on the high side, making a dual harder to use.
NOT TRUE!!!
40 years ago, I measured the THD of a bunch of small signal transistors in a simple follower configuration, and they're all different: the more exoctic brands like Ferranti (now Zetex) the worst, the established American brands like Motorola in the middle, and the "classic" European brands like Philips the best. The results range from .009% to .2%.
Attachments
You can see a lot of variation in small signal transistors because different manufacturers will be using different processes and different die layouts to make the ‘same transistor’. They meet the same data sheet specs, but things that affect distortion and perhaps noise can be quite different. The TIPs are generic power transistors with fairly loose specs. You will see differences between brands, but they are not likely to matter in the application. And they will all be using similar cheap and dirty epitaxial base processes, with similar die sizes to meet the Rth spec. You’re always going to get high and variable (with respect to Vce) output capacitance, and a beta that falls off to the low tens at rated current. What happens at low current is anybody’s guess - and if that is important to you get different makes and measure them. But since the spec is so loose, don’t expect miracles in matching from batch to batch.
Totally agree with you on the LM4562. I use LME49720 ordered from DigiKey.
Single ICs to replace a 5534 is difficult to find at reasonable cost. I paid $6 per piece for the LT1115 and consider it very good price.
And then you still need to make sure that the application actually plays to the part's advantages... which mostly means low source impedances in this example. In a phono MM application, results would be rather tragic in the noise department.
single op-amp in DIP-8
I ordered the LT1115 for Wayne Palmer's moving coil phono stage build, not for 5534 replacement. I just use it to show that very few single op-amp in DIP-8 were available. I have not used a MM cartridge for a long time.
The LT1115, LT1028 and AD797 are all super high input stage bias current op amps, part of the reason why a dual of these amplifiers is not feasible. As was mentioned, their input current noise will likely be the dominant noise source in a MM phono application - they're great amps, but their input stage is optimized for impedances closer to 50-70Ω, far enough away from a MM cartridge to be annoying noise-wise.
What might make the best sense for a 5534 replacement these days is to rig up an SO-8 package LM4562 / LME49720 dual on an SMD adapter as a single with the other half wired "off". At least then you could use an amplifier that makes sense as a 5534 replacement.
What might make the best sense for a 5534 replacement these days is to rig up an SO-8 package LM4562 / LME49720 dual on an SMD adapter as a single with the other half wired "off". At least then you could use an amplifier that makes sense as a 5534 replacement.
Hi Zung,
That research is good if we can find the same devices and manufacturers, etc.
40 years ago and today we've seen much change.
I agree with you, not all part number designations of the same part mean
they are the same.
Mark Johnson (if you can find his post) had very insightful comments about this, when they
bought devices, they would measure the devices and choose the
component that beat the data sheet by the largest margin,
then they would hammer the manufacture down on pricing.
Or course you can do this when your buying millions of devices monthly.
It shure would be a nice list to have, those devices that beat the
data sheet specs by the largest margin.
That research is good if we can find the same devices and manufacturers, etc.
40 years ago and today we've seen much change.
I agree with you, not all part number designations of the same part mean
they are the same.
Mark Johnson (if you can find his post) had very insightful comments about this, when they
bought devices, they would measure the devices and choose the
component that beat the data sheet by the largest margin,
then they would hammer the manufacture down on pricing.
Or course you can do this when your buying millions of devices monthly.
It shure would be a nice list to have, those devices that beat the
data sheet specs by the largest margin.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.