553x Not fast enough. Not even really fast enough for I/v use in a 176.4 DAC.
Please pardon the misspellings and occassional insane word substitution I'm on an iPhone
> On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:50 PM, Ellis Burman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Not only what listening environment outside of an anechoic chamber has 120
> dB dynamic range, but also what recording environment? I'd imagine the
> breathing of the musicians would be well above that!
> True, a mic pre-amp is a much more demanding application for an op-amp than
> a line-level buffer. Still, I'd be more concerned with the slew rate
> limits of the 5532. In my mind, the whole idea of DSD is to capture
> transient information (at least that's what I hear with DSD or higher
> sample rates, or direct-to-disc recording for that matter.) I haven't done
> the math though - maybe 9V/uS is fast enough, even at 5.6 MHz sample rate.
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>> You two are more expert than I, but I think a 5532 is fine in this
>> application because you have built-in level limits by the nature of digital
>> zero. So as long as you can design your analog sections to accomodate low
>> distortion at digital zero (and leave a few dB headroom for over-sample
>> problems with rate and format conversions), then I'm not sure what audible
>> differences there would be in using a designer chip. Aren't the designer
>> chips more appropriate for mic preamps or inside condenser mics?
>> With the high-resolution formats in the download world, I'm starting to
>> see marketing again based on crazy claims of dynamic range. Benchmark, a
>> company that can stand on its reputation, showed a new power amp at the AES
>> Convention. Their marketing hook is that they can demonstrate something
>> like a 120dB range from their noise floor to whatever distortion figure
>> they find objectionable. But, what listening environment outside of an
>> anacholic chamber has 120dB dynamic range? And what music that provides any
>> pleasure needs 120dB dynamic range? It's not good for your ears to be
>> exposed to 120dB above silence, but no one seems to talk about that. I
>> remember the dynamic range claims with early digital, which definitely had
>> a lower noise floor than any tape recorder. The problem was, when there was
>> sound, it often wasn't as good as the sound coming off the allegedly noisy
>> -- Tom Fine
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stamler" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 6:48 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] $1K DSD recorder
>>> On 10/25/2013 4:28 PM, Ellis Burman wrote:
>>>> But it's funny how manufacturers are still touting the NE5532 op-amp. I
>>>> used them over 25 years ago in my designs for Quad Eight. They're fine
>>>> lot of legendary consoles used them - Neve, Quad Eight, SSL, etc) but
>>>> are many better op-amps available now.
>>> Yes, the good ol' 5532 has been surpassed in many ways by more recent
>>> designs -- but for an excellent balance of low noise and clean performance
>>> *at low price*, it's hard to beat.
> [log in to unmask]