How do people do it? Buying a new console

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
living sounds said:
In my console I get much lower distortion and noise with NE5532/34 than with TL072/71 even though the circuits were actually designed for the latter. Better grounding and decoupling was added, of course.
that depends on the application... in summing amps 553x is likely superior.
I guess if you were really carefull with loads and only used it in inverting configurations it could be ok, but it should be difficult to design an entire console with only TL072 and not make compromises wrt performance.
But why would somebody do that..? I often used 3 flavors of op amps in console design, high z low gain, low z higher gain/drive, and don't care using $0.12 op amps (like 4560) where it doesn't matter.

JR
 
living sounds said:
In my console I get much lower distortion and noise with NE5532/34 than with TL072/71 even though the circuits were actually designed for the latter. Better grounding and decoupling was added, of course.
That is probably the main reason for the increased performance.

I guess if you were really carefull with loads and only used it in inverting configurations it could be ok, but it should be difficult to design an entire console with only TL072 and not make compromises wrt performance.
As JR mentioned, there are places where a TL0 is inadequate, for example in summing amps, where a 553x has a 12-14 dB advantage in terms of noise, or for output stages. However, a TL0 paired with a VLN transistor outperforms them.
 
abbey road d enfer said:
That is probably the main reason for the increased performance.
As JR mentioned, there are places where a TL0 is inadequate, for example in summing amps, where a 553x has a 12-14 dB advantage in terms of noise, or for output stages. However, a TL0 paired with a VLN transistor outperforms them.

What about a 553x with a VLN transistor? , one thing I dont like about the TL0 is that it goes berserk when you go over its common mode voltage input range
 
user 37518 said:
one thing I dont like about the TL0 is that it goes berserk when you go over its common mode voltage input range
In a well-designed audio circuit, this should not happen. Once you know this limitation, it's easy to get around it. Thousands of mixers have been successfully designed this way.
 
abbey road d enfer said:
In a well-designed audio circuit, this should not happen. Once you know this limitation, it's easy to get around it. Thousands of mixers have been successfully designed this way.

Any special recommendations? I know that this is more likely to happen in followers rather than amplifiers with gain or inverting amplifiers which have zero CMV.
 
There are plenty of better fet opamps these days.  Unless cost is the main parameter,  I don't see a good reason for sticking with the TL07x series.  Even Trident is not using them in their current 500 series 80b eq.
 
john12ax7 said:
There are plenty of better fet opamps these days.  Unless cost is the main parameter,  I don't see a good reason for sticking with the TL07x series.  Even Trident is not using them in their current 500 series 80b eq.
what are they using now?
I've been digging the OPA1642 in eq circuits.
 
user 37518 said:
Any special recommendations? I know that this is more likely to happen in followers rather than amplifiers with gain or inverting amplifiers which have zero CMV.
The inverting issue with TL0's occurs when the CM voltage is about 2-3 volts from the positive rail. It's nor tto difficult to design the circuit in a way it never happens.
 
john12ax7 said:
There are plenty of better fet opamps these days.
Indeed. OPA1642 is an obvious candidate for replacement of TL072, even for 5532 as long as it is not required to drive less than 2 kohms.
I have used OPA1642 in LN instrumentation, where the difference between 5nv/sqrtHz (OPA) and 18nV/sqrtHz (TL0) is significant.
OTOH, I compared OPA's and TL0's in DI boxes, with no operational difference.

Unless cost is the main parameter,  I don't see a good reason for sticking with the TL07x series.
In some cases, I don't see a good reason for not sticking to TL0's. Actually, I don't think that using OPA164x instead of TL0xallows a significant improvement in performance of a mixer channel; marginal inprovement in frequency response (who can hear it?), in noise level or THD is probably not enough of a motivation to increase the BOM.

Even Trident is not using them in their current 500 series 80b eq.
I can't speak for them, but there may be several reasons, not all perfectly objective.
 
The LM4562 is going for almost a $1.60 at mouser, there is no reason to even use 5532s anymore...
 
I think the newer Trident EQ is using OPA2134. Still need to check out the OPA1642 to compare.

Using TLE2071/2 was a big sonic improvement over TL071/2 in an EQ I did.  Noise a little better and 12dB less 3rd harmonic distortion.  I would think the difference would be quite audible and measurable in a full mixer.  Though I could  see TL07x still useful for a guitar box.

LM4562, isn't there a popcorn noise issue with them,  or has that been resolved?
 
john12ax7 said:
LM4562, isn't there a popcorn noise issue with them,  or has that been resolved?

Apparently they changed the process they use to fabricate both the LM4562 and LME49720, I followed the thread on TI but it hasnt been updated for a long time. I've been using them with no problems.

Edit: Just noticed that the TI thread is locked, perhaps they got tired of the 'inconvenience', here it is for those interested: https://e2e.ti.com/support/audio/f/6/t/415907#pi320995=1
 
I'm just combining small consoles, outboard gear and summing equipment.
I think the only way to get a decent large console for a deal is to keep an eye on "local-pickup" listings in larger city's close to you.
I don't think 99.99 percent of people really can afford a large nice console. My co-worker's old 5 room mega-studio which was ran by one of the biggest names in the industry went bankrupt because they bought a $250k SSL desk :-\
 
outraged said:
I'm just combining small consoles, outboard gear and summing equipment.
I think the only way to get a decent large console for a deal is to keep an eye on "local-pickup" listings in larger city's close to you.
I don't think 99.99 percent of people really can afford a large nice console. My co-worker's old 5 room mega-studio which was ran by one of the biggest names in the industry went bankrupt because they bought a $250k SSL desk :-\

I got an MCI JH-528C for 500 USD because the owner's girlfriend wanted extra room in their apartment. Of course I spent tenfold making it work.
 
john12ax7 said:
I think the newer Trident EQ is using OPA2134. Still need to check out the OPA1642 to compare.

Using TLE2071/2 was a big sonic improvement over TL071/2 in an EQ I did.  Noise a little better and 12dB less 3rd harmonic distortion.  I would think the difference would be quite audible and measurable in a full mixer.  Though I could  see TL07x still useful for a guitar box.

LM4562, isn't there a popcorn noise issue with them,  or has that been resolved?

Yes Trident is using the opa134/2134 for single and duel chip replacement of the tl071/072
 
outraged said:
I'm just combining small consoles, outboard gear and summing equipment.
I think the only way to get a decent large console for a deal is to keep an eye on "local-pickup" listings in larger city's close to you.
I don't think 99.99 percent of people really can afford a large nice console. My co-worker's old 5 room mega-studio which was ran by one of the biggest names in the industry went bankrupt because they bought a $250k SSL desk :-\

Besides the financial side, people simply don't have room for these ancient giants. The largest Soundcraft in the world (104 channels) has been on sale for almost a decade now. The outboard gear, mics and all the rest was sold in less than a year.

That's why 16 channels sell, and 56 channels don't. But prices have been goin' down for years now. New small mixers have gotten a lot cheaper and that puts pressure on the 2nd hand market. And more and more people realise you don't really need a mixer...
 
cyrano said:
And more and more people realise you don't really need a mixer...

I disagree, I always prefer recording with a mixer, its simpler, faster, you can eq on the run, inserts can be activated and deactivated,, etc.. But I see your point, I've been to studios that tell me that Im the only guy using the complete console, most people just use it to monitor 2 channels.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top