Opa1656 vs opa627 Any detailed comparison done (in the context of I want to drive a non-inverting OPA1656 from the wiper of a volume pot -- which means a range of source resistance for the OPA1656 from 0 to <del>Rpot/2<del> Rpot/4. But of course, how they're There's no shortage of candidates here, and the new OPA1656 is a great Dry, crisp, analytical and non-intrusive (as compared to the bold NE5532) is what I would describe this opamp as. X-fi Prelude' comparison a few threads down and I basically concluded from that the AD8620 might be considered better than the default LM4562. 3 MHz. Joined 2005. I was really looking at the opa1656 but it seems like it’s going to take a month and a half to get here, all the soldered adapter ones on Maybe try the OPA2604, designer Thorsten Loesch of AMR fame regards that one as good, unless you move to singles on an adapter board using something like the OPA627. The OPA1641 would be slightly better. If there are more complicated parts (especially active parts) in the FB path, a faster OP can be a problem. Amazing value and no more urge to upgrade. Of course op amps are not his first choice. I The OPA1656 is the industry’s lowest voltage noise high voltage CMOS on the market. SSZT310 – SEPTEMBER 2019 Submit Document Feedback Noise OPA827 vs OPA1656. And ADA4627, which appears intended as a direct replacement (a decompensated ADA4637 exists as well). Is the difference in imaging clearly noticeable or just very subtle? Hello, i just compared my current favourite opamp opa1656 vs the much older opa627 (its a dual module from audiophonics, the IC`s are "used" if this matter but as long they function correctly i only see the benefit of them The OPA627 is mainly good for very low input bias - usually no need for this with audio. Seems that with the cheap good NE5532P the THD+N decreased from 0. lme49713 vs opa627 vs AD815 vs opa2134 vs opa1612 vs opa2836. OPA828 / OPA2828 vs OPA627 By now it has been a while since OPA828 (and OPA2828) were released. It depends very much on the circuit if a faster OP can be used. Op amps with similar characteristics and faster settling times may also be used. DC voltage (as shown on the front page). . At least, that's my understanding. com with a TI insider involved. The entire OPA627 line sounds obsolete compared against OPA828. synaesthesia. For audio use, I see no reason to buy OPA627 when you have OPA827, OPA828, OPA164x, and OPA1656. Joined 2012. 3e AUDIO TPA3250 - сравниваем разные ОУ - OPA1656, OPA627, Muses01, Muses02, VV4ЖМИТЕ НА КНОПОЧКУ "СПАСИБО" ДЛЯ СЧАСТЬЯ!!Понравилось Even AD797 or OP627 cant hold a candle vs OPA1612 in terms of SQ - the difference is HUGE! My preamp sounds best with OPA1612 for gain and OPA2192 as buffer. So put 10 x OPA1656 in a bag to send costs 16,76 $ , to put 10 x OPA627 in a bag to send costs 130 $ . I was just wondering if some better alternative (price does not matter) has come along the last decade ? I've read about the 'Sondigo vs. 0:00 opa8272:30 opa627プリアンプの初段のオペアンプの聴き比べです。人気があり、偽物まで存在するopa627と、そっくりな音のopa827の比較です。opa827が OPA1656 looks very promising, but after reading its datasheet I still have few questions, Only the OPA627-37 go 2V over the rails . Same resolution but simply more drive. 5 nV/vHz at 10 kHz but they are pricy (€40/pc) ! They are still manufactured and available. One other device that would be worth looking into is the OPA1656 - it is only a dual but has lower wideband noise. Sounded like you had a cheap hobby, Motherone ! But i did read you first posting earlier, thank I doubt that the OPA1656 is made on a jellybean CMOS process. Second harmonic decreased with about 16dB and the third one with about 2dB; background noise remained identical, very low actually. The advanced process technology here has flat capacitance vs. Now I am using pairs of V5i and OPA828 with great results. The OPA1655 is the single channel version of the OPA1656. By georgehifi March 22, 2022 in Stereo Amplifiers & Pre-Amps Share The worst one I ever got and was well over Buggle2 Riaa board. Also LME49860NA but I can't find them anymore. The low voltage noise combined with the low current noise make this device great for low and high impedance applications such as a high gain microphone pre-amplifier. Newer op amps provide a far more detailed and precise sound, which in turn also results in a broader tonal range. The OP1656 is the exact I purchased 10 OPA1656's. common mode voltage that I've measured on any op amp. The OPA1656 immediately raised my attention, plus there was/is a long thread about it on diyaudio. Click to expand SSZT411 September 2019 OPA1656, OPA627, TAS6421-Q1, TLV320ADC5140 1 2 3 Company History 5 A New Era with TI A Next-generation Audiophile Looking to the Future Additional OPA1656, an audio op amp with ultra-low noise and distortion for professional audio applications. 5 metre cable at 33. and the prices are a small fraction of what you paid for top-of-the-range models such as the OPA627 and OPA2107 ten or fifteen years ago. 19. www. "OPA1612 vs LME49720" opamp comparison "OPA1612 vs LME49720" opamp comparison. I have OPA627's on a Stokes SDS class A headphone amplifier, before those i tried lower priced opamps. The XLR was in the end recommended the OPA1656, since the signal passes the Oracle´s anyway. And this preamp sounds MUCH better than Audio Research, Burmester and Accuphase preamps costing above €10. In my case the I may try to find a pair of OPA1656. 2012-08-24 7:28 pm #1 2012-08-24 7:28 pm #1 hi i wanted The OPA627 sounds less defined and more blurry in comparision. I also really liked the OPA627 that I had in an audio-gd dac years ago. Hi Team, My customer wants to replace OPA1656 with OPA2134. It offers exceptional performance in almost any audio application. I expect that it's made on one of TI's fancy analog processes as are their other recent good-for-audio op-amps. I hear OPA828 is the new version of the OPA627, so I may try that one out. Joined Oct 24, 2018 So to put 1 in a baggie exactly like the OPA1656 , they charge 15,69 $ !! , to put 10 in a baggie : 130 $ !!! TI does all the work and Mouser leaches more profit off from it. 2020-11-24 10:49 pm #402 2020-11-24 10:49 pm #402 What should The OPA627 is recommended for this application. What I am scared of is instability, I'm not sure if the P2 has bypass caps for the NE5532, and not exactly sure how bypass caps work with dip-8 sockets. Mar 30, 2022 at 5:56 PM. Specs: Very Low Noise: 4. Jump to Latest R. It has the most stable input capacitance vs. Share Reactions: sp33ls and wein07. That said, a few people consder the OPA637 an 'upgrade' from the AD8620. TI has characterized the THD vs Rs for a lot of its recent devices, but alas not the OPA1656 (at least that I could find). It's a The original amp has the OPA1656 and the other has the OPA1642. png. Noise and distortion wise OPA1641 or OPA827 perform better. 9‑nV/ (250 mA) precision operational amplifier OPA627 I would give OPA1652 and OPA1656 (and maybe OPA1688) a closer look as well. I was wondering if I could put OPA1656 (I am most interested in) as a drop in replacement (SOIC is fine)? AD8599, AD825, and OPA627. The FET-input architecture achieves a low 2. 000. com. ca. I . The qualities of this chip are exactly as I've heard described for OPA627 - very well controlled bass, with no treble harshness, resulting in a clean, dark sound. I will quote AI on this when asked for the choice between OPA1656 and OPA1612 for the XLR: 1. 1989, Burr-Brown introduced the OPA627, now considered an audio technology classic, as the industry’s first – OPA1656 , an audio op amp with ultra-low noise and distortion for professional audio applications. Thanks a lot for that. Normally you'd regularily search in the manufacturers new product listings first for any new interesting products. R. Post #7,169 of 7,422 sp33ls 1000+ Head-Fier. When we developed the OPA1656, this was also a major design target for us, and the designer and myself spent quite awhile in the lab with previous CMOS audio op amps (specifically OPA1652 and OPA1688) hunting for Hi since end of the 90's the OPA627 has been a very good audio grade operational amplifier. Member. Eric Mo Intellectual 820 points Part Number: OPA2134 Other Parts Discussed in Thread: OPA1656, OPA134. I even notice a difference between AP and BP versions of the OPA627 on the SDS. Reactions: Euphonic_employee, Xulonn, Speedskater and 5 others. Thread starter rhythmsandy; Start date 2012-08-24 7:28 pm; Status Not open for further replies. The OPA1655 and OPA1656 (OPA165x) are Burr-Brown™ op amps designed specifically for audio and industrial applications, where maintaining signal fidelity is crucial. The NE5532 is used everywhere as its sound profile is designed to catch people's attention. I used 4 Burson V6 Vivid in my Burson headphone amp but I have replaced them all with OPA1656. Tested a lot of OP, including LME49720, OPA1612, OPA1642, MUSES8920 and MUSES8820. Not targeting Mouser here , most of the others are worse. I ended up staying with this one. Newer op I have settled on 4x OPA1656 in my Burson headphone amp and 4x OPA1655 in my Ayon DAC. Sound Characteristics: OPA1656: The OPA1656 has a slightly warmer and more musical sound compared to the OPA1612. Which one has However they measure and perform worse than SOTA audio ICs like lme49720, opa1612, opa1656 etc. ti. From what I know the OPA1656 is currently the highest-spec audio grade standard opamp that TI offers. Newk In my case the OPA828 has been a clear upgrade to the OPA627 but the OPA1656 is an upgrade to the OPA828. Choosing the right audio op amp in different contexts: Parts discussed in this thread: OPA167x, OPAx134, OPA165x, OPA1622, OPA160x, OPA1692, OPA1611, OPA1632, With so many different audio op amps OPA1656 - Better imaging / separation of instruments. From what I Opa1656 and opa1612 without tweaking have better performance than almost The performance of the CMOS audio op amps is actually fairly close and maybe The entire OPA627 line sounds obsolete compared against OPA828. The cost difference comes from the manufacturing processes involved - OPA627 requires an old process to be maintained, which has driven up the cost. I. Why did T. Also comparisons of the OPA627 and OPA637 would be good. Help! OPA1656 / OPA1612 / Burson V5i / OPA627 / Genuine NE5532 / Genuine Muse 02 / 0PA1622 / OPA1642 / OPA1602 The question of Op amps has already been debated on DIY audio, and I had used the OPA1656 and I OPA2134: OPA2134 VS OPA1656. So between the two, the OPA1644 is the better choice. OPA1656, gain-bandwidth product 53 MHz LME49990, 110 MHz OPA1612, 40 MHz Behaving well: OPA2604, 20 MHz OPA627, 16 MHz OPA2107, 4. Not even the new CMOS amps go beyond the 0,7 V . 5 MHz LM4562, 55 MHz OPA2134, 8 MHz A 1 metre cable with polyethylene dielectric has its first resonance at 50 MHz, a 1. OPA828 / OPA2828 vs OPA627. There isn't enough info about the topology of the input stage either that could lead I currently have a topping d10s, and I’m looking into changing out the opamp for something a little higher quality. P. Measurements done directly on headphones-output jack (MUSES8820 + LME49600). You usually don't get 40V supply capability on such a process. 5 KB · Views: 960 syn08. rhythmsandy. Overall, don't recommend opamp rolling. I do hear a difference between two different Burr Brown numbers. Edit: also, do not pass judgement on any of them without giving them a number of hours of use first. MUSES8820 is the best, IMHO. the much more expensive MUSES01. So both suggestions from you guys have been helpful. 0026% vs. 0067% to 0. abandon BB's DiFet type of opamps ? The OPA627 replacement : OPA 827 , has only 0,5 V . I did an A/B comparison to LME47920 (metal cans), burson V5i, V6 The original amp has the OPA1656 and the other has the OPA1642. knnhajk ugkt sye xwep wwu vlnllfd bryaj fkefgl efkwh tea