Does Op-amp Rolling Work?

[SIY]

My original post was that the amp used in the video had a THDN of 0.003. NC252MP uses the same NE5532 and on this forum was tested to have THDN 0f 0.0014. So the final amplification stage of the amplifier may be the limiting factor.

So you're walking back all your claims after that about audible differences? Wise move.

And I hope you follow it up with some ears-only tests of your own when trying to validate extraordinary audibility claims.

 

[amirm]

This leads me to believe that it is possible to hear the differences. But it would mean that you need to know the music and to be paying careful attention.

So what is this music? And how come practically everyone who tries these tweaks, no matter what their system or music they play, "hears" such improvement?

Why doesn't the manufacture suggest such a music? Or limit the improvement claims to such?

This what Sparkos says about their "discrete" opamps:

"Op amps are a key component for processing and amplifying audio signals. They can be found in virtually all audio gear in the form of tiny integrated circuits (IC's) like the one laying on its back in the picture. They also come with all of the pitfalls and shortcomings that IC op amps have, like limited power dissapation [sic] and crummy compensation capacitors. Discrete op amps do not have these limitations, and are a vastly superior op amp for amplifying audio signals than their IC counterparts are. They can run much higher power, have much deeper class A bias, and deliver a much more realistic and detailed sound. Discrete op amps also permit the use of high quality compensation capacitors, and allow for two pole compensation schemes which are impossible to implement in IC designs. All of this translates into a more detailed and engaging listening experience with better imaging and soundstaging than IC op amps can deliver. In short, discrete designs are the best op amp for audio."

Tell me why they make these general statements I have bolded instead the disclaimers you used.

 

[im_gumby]

Do you believe that matters?

Where is your threshold of skepticism? Green CD markers? Shakti stones? Is there a limit to the potential improvement to be gained by 'better' (generally meaning high $$) cables than lamp cord, or does it just scale up to infinity?

How about USB or toslink? Trying to get an idea about how much of the propaganda you've bought into.

This is a good time to maybe take a break from making bad analogies and read through more of the forum where some version of this discussion has taken place somewhere around 8 million times.

My threshold is fairly reasonable.

I'll spend money on a good USB-C 4 as a connection cable. But not on an 'audio grade' USB-C cable.
I'll get a 10GbE network switch over a 1GbE 'audiophile grade' switch.
I'll put in a line conditioner battery backup from Grainger (Eton for example) that I use for my rack of servers over an 'audiophile grade' power conditioner.

I'll buy better wire than lamp cord when I make my own speaker cables. But I won't spend more than a couple of bucks per foot for the wire.

Right now I am using BT from my laptop to my speakers over airplay because of the delay where it mucks up video calls. Because my stero is behind me, I don't want to run a wire in the walls/ceiling to connect them.

I use USB-C from my laptop to my dongle dac to headphones. Or when out and about my DX180. And while I could use the DX180 as a USB or BT DAC, I prefer my Alpha Onix which is 1/4th the price. The interesting thing is that the Onix Alpha uses the CS dac chip and when it came out.. blew away not only other implementations using the same CS chip, but also some of the other implementations of other dac chips that were supposed to be better.

I also won't go out and buy the next best thing until what I have dies. (Or is no longer supported.)

Oh and I'll buy a great class D over a Tube or class A , A/B amp because I want something that sips power...

In terms of camera... I'm old school Nikon all the way. But then again, when I was 17, I was a stringer for the local paper.

BTW I read thru the forum... been reading and I do like what I see from Amir and his tests. But had to question the op amp thing.
This is one where you can't say its all snake oil.

 

[uwotm8]

- Internet asks for recording of differences
- Internet does not hear differences
- Internet blames recording method for removing the differences

Well, I've seen the opposite as well - when videos with differences was called incorrect/fake/whatever.

something like that from 9:35
Or this one

Oh, almost forgot a lovely one

In before: "youtube listening" is wrong, the problem is volume matching (PROVE ITS MATCHED!!1), and who you (me) actually are - and so on

 

[wwenze]

It is also my question. You all keep saying soundstage has widened, deepened, etc. You say this with every upgrade. How can the soundstage become wider and deeper constantly? Why isn't there a limit to it? You get a new DAC and soundstage expands. You get an amp and soundstage expands. You get new cables and soundstage expands. You put the devices on a stand and soundstage expands. You get AC conditioner and soundstage expands. I am asking how you are measuring this. It is a 3-D space thing, right? How do you know the actual size as to now it being larger?

Like this

https://twitter.com/x/status/1413091404079714306

 

[jra]

Most of the music I listen to (from the 1960's - 1980's) has already passed through who knows how many stages of TL072/NE5532 op amps in mixing boards and other electronics in the chain between the musicians and the end product (vinyl/cassettes/CD/other). No amount of op amp rolling is going to unring that bell.

 

[im_gumby]

So what is this music? And how come practically everyone who tries these tweaks, no matter what their system or music they play, "hears" such improvement?

Why doesn't the manufacture suggest such a music? Or limit the improvement claims to such?

This what Sparkos says about their "discrete" opamps:

"Op amps are a key component for processing and amplifying audio signals. They can be found in virtually all audio gear in the form of tiny integrated circuits (IC's) like the one laying on its back in the picture. They also come with all of the pitfalls and shortcomings that IC op amps have, like limited power dissapation [sic] and crummy compensation capacitors. Discrete op amps do not have these limitations, and are a vastly superior op amp for amplifying audio signals than their IC counterparts are. They can run much higher power, have much deeper class A bias, and deliver a much more realistic and detailed sound. Discrete op amps also permit the use of high quality compensation capacitors, and allow for two pole compensation schemes which are impossible to implement in IC designs. All of this translates into a more detailed and engaging listening experience with better imaging and soundstaging than IC op amps can deliver. In short, discrete designs are the best op amp for audio."

Tell me why they make these general statements I have bolded instead the disclaimers you used.

Ok, in your previous question you asked about how these upgrades can always increase the soundstage.

Need to clarify... the videos and reports on other forums (yes I read a couple taking it all in...) they all talk about going from the standard TI OPA chips to something else... when they try it... its almost always positive. But when they go from lets say a Sparkos or a Burson... the results are mixed. Some say that the other chips don't sound as good or there was a mix of good and bad things. Even the Burson Vivids vs the Classics have different sound characteristics.

I've used soundstage, clarity, presence as examples of what others have said. Sparkos says imaging. I don't know what disclaimers I am making other than saying I'm skeptical and not sure of how valid either extreme is in this argument.

In earlier posts on this thread, I used the term subjective. Meaning that a quantitative number isn't given or available.
I used the example ... he was going fast. Now how fast is fast? I don't know its relative.
What one person experiences will vary from another.

So you test the TI OPA that everyone uses as the default op-amp. ( Price is a factor)
Did you test it against a Sparkos? I saw Sonic Imagery...

And again, when i talked about a change in sound stage, you said it would have to have some measurable change in the signal. Ok, so where would we see this?
And how much of a change would be required to be noticable? And how would you test for it? I don't know which is why I am asking.

And that's my point in all of this...

On the one hand I hear tons of people talking about the impact of rolling op amps.
Are they *all* delusional?
Which is why I am asking you... who does measurements... what are we not seeing?

In my analogy, I tried to point out that while you're doing tests and they show one thing... is there another test that would show more information?

Thx

 

[Labjr]

Most of the music I listen to (from the 1960's - 1980's) has already passed through who knows how many stages of TL072/NE5532 op amps in mixing boards and other electronics in the chain between the musicians and the end product (vinyl/cassettes/CD/other). No amount of op amp rolling is going to unring that bell.

Remixing helps.

 

[JSmith]

Along this issue... I know that I've listen to some YT videos where they playback different units playing the same song... and I couldn't hear a difference. I switch to my IEMs which are better quality... and I can hear the subtle changes. (I went back to my cheaper headphones and couldn't hear the differences, so it wasn't psychosomatic )

YT videos? C'mon Gumby, one doesn't compare devices via such methods.

Maybe this analogy works...

Nope... they rarely do.

but that they don't tell the complete story.

Not this old chestnut again... you're arguing here with some that design and build the very amps many use. If you're going to question things in this way, do some homework on signal amplification and try to prove your assertions properly, not with bizarre analogies and audiophile tropes.

You may find this site of interest;

Audio woo

Audio woo consists of various vague and unsupported claims for devices or methods for getting better sound quality from systems that reproduce recorded music. Such claims are made by manufacturers, hobbyists, and writers in the field.

rationalwiki.org

No one here has any reason to lie to you... this is an independent site without advertising or sponsors. Think about other audio forums, many have a large number of sponsors and advertising. Please consider that then by extension that anything you read on such forums should be taken with a grain of salt.


JSmith

 

[im_gumby]

That's why copper has to be 99.99999% pure and not 99.9999%, otherwise the soundstage will not stop expanding.

Now you're just being silly.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Are they *all* delusional?

No, of course not. No one is implying such a thing.

What keeps being repeated but you keep ignoring or dismissing is the effect our brains have on what we perceive. As others have said, there is no doubt those people think they heard a difference even though an actual, audible difference does not exist. You ask how can this be and we keep telling you there are a number of known psychological explanations. None of them involving delusion.

I go back to HDMI cables. Even to this day there are people who are adamant they can see visual differences between a $10 and $500 HDMI cables even though both are tested to work identically.

How would you explain why these people see a difference?

 

[amirm]

Need to clarify... the videos and reports on other forums (yes I read a couple taking it all in...) they all talk about going from the standard TI OPA chips to something else... when they try it... its almost always positive.

Which shouldn't be given how different these opamps are from each other.

But when they go from lets say a Sparkos or a Burson... the results are mixed. Some say that the other chips don't sound as good or there was a mix of good and bad things. Even the Burson Vivids vs the Classics have different sound characteristics.

Then you must get your story straight before measurements can explain it. It can't be that half the time the answer is 1, and the other, 25.

 

[amirm]

In earlier posts on this thread, I used the term subjective. Meaning that a quantitative number isn't given or available.

Oh? Why not. Psychoacoustic research into localization absolutely involves getting feedback from user on where they think a sound source is. If i shut off one speaker, the sound completely shifts to the other, right? That is a measurement of localization.

The point being that if I got 5 of you in a room, listening to the same system, each one of you will say something different about soundstage. Until you all get your story consistent, you can't correlate them to equipment performance.

 

[amirm]

So you test the TI OPA that everyone uses as the default op-amp. ( Price is a factor)
Did you test it against a Sparkos? I saw Sonic Imagery...

What is magical about Sparkos? You are claiming that Sonic Imagery doesn't do it but Sparkos does? Regardless, as i post earlier, I have tested that opamp as well: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-opamp-review-sonic-imagery-vs-sparkos.10325/

I post this earlier. The green line is the standard OPA part in the buffer. I then replaced it with Sparkos and Sonic Imagery. Both lost to the stock part as far as distortion. Tiny difference that is not audible but it is there.

If you are going to argue so much, please read the responses and data presented.

 

[oleg87]

On the one hand I hear tons of people talking about the impact of rolling op amps.
Are they *all* delusional?
Which is why I am asking you... who does measurements... what are we not seeing?

Well, it's easy to imagine swapping random op-amps making things worse, so I'm sure in many cases there might be some audible effect (ie it's oscillating at frequencies you can't hear and severely degrading audible performance).
But if the op-amp in use is working properly, stable, not generating audible distortion or noise, then there's not really anywhere to go but down.

 

[aagstn]

Well, it's easy to imagine swapping random op-amps making things worse, so I'm sure in many cases there might be some audible effect (ie it's oscillating at frequencies you can't hear and severely degrading audible performance).
But if the op-amp in use is working properly, stable, not generating audible distortion or noise, then there's not really anywhere to go but down.

I think you may have hit on a reason besides imagination. I've seen people praise dacs and amps that end up having a ton of distortion when tested. I think some of the praise they have for different op amps improving dynamics or mid range or whatever is just that the noise they are adding is audible and they like it the way it mixes with the music. People loving noise is clear from the popularity of vinyl alone.

 

[im_gumby]

YT videos? C'mon Gumby, one doesn't compare devices via such methods.

Nope... they rarely do.

Not this old chestnut again... you're arguing here with some that design and build the very amps many use. If you're going to question things in this way, do some homework on signal amplification and try to prove your assertions properly, not with bizarre analogies and audiophile tropes.

You may find this site of interest;

Audio woo

Audio woo consists of various vague and unsupported claims for devices or methods for getting better sound quality from systems that reproduce recorded music. Such claims are made by manufacturers, hobbyists, and writers in the field.

rationalwiki.org

No one here has any reason to lie to you... this is an independent site without advertising or sponsors. Think about other audio forums, many have a large number of sponsors and advertising. Please consider that then by extension that anything you read on such forums should be taken with a grain of salt.


JSmith

Look,

I am not suggesting anyone is lying here. BTW on the other sites... the information isn't coming from vendors by other users who have the products.
But I am also questioning the dogma here.

I do realize who is in the audience.

I mentioned earlier I saw a YT video of someone who was building a Purifi based amp. He said that Bruno P. told him to swamp out the op amp w a Sparkos...
(I wish I could remember who that was... cause I know someone here will claim its BS until I produce a link.)

But this got me thinking about the whole op amp thing.
Bruno is a god when it comes to amplifiers. So if he recommended someone changing out the op amp... what does he know? Right?

 

[SuicideSquid]

Look,

I am not suggesting anyone is lying here. BTW on the other sites... the information isn't coming from vendors by other users who have the products.
But I am also questioning the dogma here.

I do realize who is in the audience.

I mentioned earlier I saw a YT video of someone who was building a Purifi based amp. He said that Bruno P. told him to swamp out the op amp w a Sparkos...
(I wish I could remember who that was... cause I know someone here will claim its BS until I produce a link.)

But this got me thinking about the whole op amp thing.
Bruno is a god when it comes to amplifiers. So if he recommended someone changing out the op amp... what does he know? Right?

You're confusing the situation here I think. Dogma is the belief, unchallenged for years, that rolling opamps makes a difference.

Doing tests that shows this isn't the case and they make little to no difference isn't dogma. It's challenging dogma. Saying "no, the evidence must be wrong because decades of wisdom inherited from our audiophile forefathers says it's so" isn't challenging the dogma, it's accepting it.

I can't speak to a half-remembered comment from Bruno but it begs the question, if Purifis work better with Spark opamps why wouldn't he have made them the recommended default in the first place?

 

[levimax]

Bruno is a god when it comes to amplifiers. So if he recommended someone changing out the op amp... what does he know?

Amir showed you measurements of a Purfi amp with different op amps. Why would you chose to believe second hand internet hearsay over professionally conducted measurements?

 

[Buckeye Amps]

I can also remember the YT video in question regarding the Sparkos comment but I also know there was more to it. I remember reading the transcript but not where. It's on the tip of my tongue.