JohnRoberts said:The Jensen (990?) was flat AFAIK... Why does it need to be a DOA? Modern ICs are quite good.
JR
hakanai said:my experience has been that a well implemented modern IC is the way to go if you want a "do no harm" kind of circuit. It's that "well implemented" part you have have to watch for! No matter how good the part spec is, we can make anything suck (new groupDIY motto?).
Ok anything else I have the urge to write gets into the not-so-productive topic of "transparent". So I'll stop myself here.
Don
r2d2 said:than is an IC opamp the best choice also for make a Line input signal unbalanced ,
or balanced for output ?
Totally agree. If I wanted a few channels of basic, yet professional, mic pre's with not much in the way of color I would just go to the THAT data sheets and call it a day (1510->1646). Same for line receiver's. I am using the 1206 in the center section of a mixer I am laying out right now.Henke said:IME, it's hard to beat the THAT 1240-series line receivers / 1646 line drivers performance-wise
hakanai said:Totally agree. If I wanted a few channels of basic, yet professional, mic pre's with not much in the way of color I would just go to the THAT data sheets and call it a day (1510->1646). Same for line receiver's. I am using the 1206 in the center section of a mixer I am laying out right now.Henke said:IME, it's hard to beat the THAT 1240-series line receivers / 1646 line drivers performance-wise
Don
r2d2 said:also mackie , soundcraft , allen & heat , many ssl units ...
are designed with ICs in the input and output stages ,
but are not considered " top/best " analog sound ,
and from that i read around ... , seem that many guys hate ICs and want only transformers , Doa , and tubes too .. ??? :-\
Andy Peters said:..............And remember -- things are designed to a price point, and also remember that there's more to a circuit than just the choice of op-amp. ct, though.-a
hakanai said:and even the most anti-social toob hound will usually admit that if you can't make a great sounding album with a SSL, it's not the SSL's fault.
r2d2 said:ssl and 5532/5534 apart
mixing with a mci 500 desk is the same that mixing with a mackie ?
otherwise would be like saying
"a ferrari is same as a Volkswagen" ...
"a manley eq or comp is same as a behringer"
what you think about ?
peace
R.
r2d2 said:Thanks for post "Andy",
some time ago i have had between the hands some ssl Xrack modules
on the cards/pcb i found many many smd components , ICs too , and not "socket" type , but soldered ,
(very very less expensive than "normal" components)
very much more difficult for repair by a not expert tech guy,
is this "design to a price" ?
i think is "design for pockets"... ,
And many Neve too like 8816 are full of smd (only 2 transformers in the LR out) ,
and new 500 version of the 1073 pre-eq and other modules are made with smd
same components placed on mackie & co.... units
You have to understand that DOA's have not been invented for "color".r2d2 said:hello
checked many pages about Doa-opamp
but seem each doa have a "personal" sound "color"
A DOA designed in accordance with the advances of technology made in the last 40 years, should be supremely transparent, just like are the über opamps (LME49710, ADA4898, OPA1611).somebody know a Doa-opamp (no Ic) that is much "transparent" as possible ?
abbey road d enfer said:The most common justification for DOA's is the fact they can run on +/-24V rail
Different people, different experience. I have used sockets for years; there was a time when IC's were not as reliable as they seem to be now. And the value of sockets for servicing does not have to be demonstrated.Andy Peters said:SOCKETS SUCK. The only reason to use a socket is because you expect to have to replace the component during the product's lifetime.
That's a comment that comes quite often. I have always used the simplest sockets, which cost a fraction of the price of the IC. The few times I have used tulip sockets, I have experienced leads breaking and being stuck in the socket when swapping. I have never seen an IC falling off a non-tulip socket.Especially when the cost of a quality socket was generally more than the part you plug into it!
Indeed. That's part of the scientific approach. Using sockets has never led me astray.So say that you've got something on the bench and it doesn't work. You suspect that an IC has failed. Certainly, if it was socketed, you could pop it out and replace it with another. But, if that's the case, then you have to ask why the component failed, and then you'll be able to prevent it from failing again. These parts just don't die for no reason. So it's worth thinking long and hard before shotgunning parts.
These points are indeed valid on a manufacturing point of view. However, for a designer who does not have the means or resources of having prototypes assembled industrially, SMD's are a challenge. Working with binoculars and hot-air is not my idea of fun. In comparison, working through-holes is a vacation.SMD construction is superior to through-hole in pretty much every way. You can't do modern high-speed digital in DIP because the lead inductance alone kills your performance. Your board density can go up so board sizes shrink, and that's a cost savings.
Agreed.notion that "hand assembled artisan electronics" are better than machine-assembled kit is rather silly.
Because the mktg dept sez it looks better on the specs.Andy Peters said:abbey road d enfer said:The most common justification for DOA's is the fact they can run on +/-24V rail
... and we need this why?
-a
Enter your email address to join: