• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Does Op-amp Rolling Work?

Rate this article on opamp rolling:

  • 1. Terrible. Didn't learn anything

    Votes: 12 4.2%

  • 2. Kind of useful but I am still not convinced

    Votes: 20 7.0%

  • 3. I learned some and agree with conclusions

    Votes: 53 18.5%

  • 4. Wonderful to have data and proof that such "upgrades" don't work

    Votes: 201 70.3%
  • Total voters
    286
Vintage02 said:
Good evening

Last year, with the advice of NTTY, I carried out a battery of measurements on a Yamaha CDX-390 CD player. Before making them, I carried out tests to see if this player was "valid". I noticed that the ceramic osillator had deviated and so I changed it to a quartz (the location was provided on the electronic board).

Originally the AOP is a 2068D but I tested 25 various AOPs and listed some measurements in an Excel table for comparison.
Here is a summary:

View attachment 441954

But the measurements being what they are, I also read 2 different tracks at each AOP change in order to be able to do ABX tests with the Foobar module.

I therefore offer you 2 recordings taken at random in the 25. I would like you to listen to them and tell me if you perceive any differences.

00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48) (02).wav

drive.google.com drive.google.com

00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(01).wav

drive.google.com drive.google.com

Personally, I have never managed to make a real difference in ABX testing.
I anonymized the names to avoid the subjective effect.

As already mentioned, I believe that for a given scheme, changing an AOP without any other modification has very little chance of making an audible difference. Moreover, it is often thought that this will be beneficial to quality, but in fact it is quite the opposite.
Click to expand...
I tried it, but couldn't find any difference.
First whether a version sounds warmer or louder, then whether the voice sounds a bit hollow in a version - nothing. Then my best differentiation criterion. Does the highhat sound metallic natural, or just like noise. Both did not sound natural in the same way. The song also doesn't have a particularly precise stage. The track is not bad in quality, but there is certainly better material where differences are more audible. I had already written that there are (https://www.oppodigital.com/hra/dsd-by-davidelias.aspx) several versions of a song in different codings on the site and there are some audible differences.
 
Fast Car track is often used as a test track in research because of the average spectrum which is kind of close to pink noise and not so much about the recording quality or that it is a very revealing track. It is pretty well recorded though so well suited as one of many 'test tracks'.
 
Last edited:
Ok the average spectrum level was good to prove wether there is a sound coloration - and i couldnt hear any. But in the denser passages it would have been nice if individual instruments could have been heard straight out - and in one version perhaps less well
 
Hello

Thank you to those who took the time to listen to Tracy Chapman's Fast Car. I chose this track because it is indeed often used as a test track.

The Yamaha CDX-390 player without being of the top of the range seems to me to meet the conditions for CD playback. The measures below can provide information in this direction.
CDX-390 Multitone.jpg

CDX-390 1kHz.jpg

Of course, measurements are not everything, but it is an indication
 
Last edited:
Vintage02 said:
But the measurements being what they are, I also read 2 different tracks at each AOP change in order to be able to do ABX tests with the Foobar module.

I therefore offer you 2 recordings taken at random in the 25. I would like you to listen to them and tell me if you perceive any differences.

00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48) (02).wav

drive.google.com drive.google.com

00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(01).wav

drive.google.com drive.google.com

Personally, I have never managed to make a real difference in ABX testing.
I anonymized the names to avoid the subjective effect.
Click to expand...

I thought I heard a difference ... ABX said ... nope :)

Code: 
foo_abx 2.2.1 report
foobar2000 v2.24.3
2025-04-05 15:05:18

File A: 00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(01).wav
SHA1: 184b291fa799175fbdb92f10b36899cd40f82cdb
File B: 00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(02).wav
SHA1: 25a32e9d4246b17aefa4faf809b5e33c24d25062

Used DSPs:
ReplayGain (alternative), Resampler (SoX), Resampler (SoX), Upmix to 5.1, Convolver (gapless), mda Dither

Output:
ASIO : 1. DM7 (3ch-LRSub)
Crossfading: NO

15:05:18 : Test started.
15:07:40 : Test restarted.
15:07:40 : 00/01
15:09:37 : Test restarted.
15:09:37 : 01/02
15:10:18 : Test restarted.
15:10:18 : 01/03
15:11:09 : Test restarted.
15:11:09 : 01/04
15:12:31 : Test restarted.
15:12:31 : 01/05
15:13:30 : Test restarted.
15:13:30 : 02/06
15:14:27 : Test restarted.
15:14:27 : 02/07
15:14:58 : Test restarted.
15:14:58 : 03/08
15:16:09 : Test restarted.
15:16:09 : 03/09
15:17:22 : Test restarted.
15:17:22 : 04/10
15:18:04 : Test restarted.
15:18:04 : 05/11
15:18:46 : Test restarted.
15:18:46 : 06/12
15:19:24 : Test restarted.
15:19:24 : 06/13
15:21:49 : Test restarted.
15:21:49 : 06/14
15:22:18 : Test restarted.
15:22:18 : 06/15
15:23:07 : Test restarted.
15:23:07 : 07/16
15:23:07 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 7/16
p-value: 0.7728 (77.28%)

 -- signature --
5af8497968ab3535c39d734be95fc44fad90fb48
 
Hello Boxerfann88,

It was the same for me ... these ABX tests made me think about how I perceived what I was listening to. Hearing a difference does not mean that this difference technically exists
 
@Vintage02 : Thanks for sharing.

I failed too (Foobar with ABX pluging).

You said they were taken random, but would you have a recording with the worst and best of what you published?
 
Hello NTTY,
I will wait before answer to your question....
 
boxerfan88 said:
I thought I heard a difference ... ABX said ... nope :)

Code: 
foo_abx 2.2.1 report
foobar2000 v2.24.3
2025-04-05 15:05:18

File A: 00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(01).wav
SHA1: 184b291fa799175fbdb92f10b36899cd40f82cdb
File B: 00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(02).wav
SHA1: 25a32e9d4246b17aefa4faf809b5e33c24d25062

Used DSPs:
ReplayGain (alternative), Resampler (SoX), Resampler (SoX), Upmix to 5.1, Convolver (gapless), mda Dither

Output:
ASIO : 1. DM7 (3ch-LRSub)
Crossfading: NO

15:05:18 : Test started.
15:07:40 : Test restarted.
15:07:40 : 00/01
15:09:37 : Test restarted.
15:09:37 : 01/02
15:10:18 : Test restarted.
15:10:18 : 01/03
15:11:09 : Test restarted.
15:11:09 : 01/04
15:12:31 : Test restarted.
15:12:31 : 01/05
15:13:30 : Test restarted.
15:13:30 : 02/06
15:14:27 : Test restarted.
15:14:27 : 02/07
15:14:58 : Test restarted.
15:14:58 : 03/08
15:16:09 : Test restarted.
15:16:09 : 03/09
15:17:22 : Test restarted.
15:17:22 : 04/10
15:18:04 : Test restarted.
15:18:04 : 05/11
15:18:46 : Test restarted.
15:18:46 : 06/12
15:19:24 : Test restarted.
15:19:24 : 06/13
15:21:49 : Test restarted.
15:21:49 : 06/14
15:22:18 : Test restarted.
15:22:18 : 06/15
15:23:07 : Test restarted.
15:23:07 : 07/16
15:23:07 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 7/16
p-value: 0.7728 (77.28%)

 -- signature --
5af8497968ab3535c39d734be95fc44fad90fb48
Click to expand...
And rightfully so:

OS.PNG


DS.PNG


DP.PNG



Lin.PNG



@Vintage02 , congrats for the recording.
 
Hello,

@Sokel Thanks for the informations.
I didn't know about Deltawave software and I just downloaded it to make my own comparisons. The results provided are interesting. However, we must learn to interpret them.,

For informations :
00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(01).wav = Burson V6
00 - CDX390 - Tracy Chapman - Fast Car (24-48)(02).wav = LME49720
 
Last edited:
Vintage02 said:
Hello,

@Sokel Thanks for the informations.
I didn't know about Deltawave software and I just downloaded it to make my own comparisons. The results provided are interesting. However, we must learn to interpret them.,
Click to expand...
It has its own thread here and the author @pkane is here too.
Best SW in the universe!
 
I now find it amazing how many people want to modify their audio devices and the means by which they try to do so.

In the past, you bought an amplifier and probably wouldn't have thought of changing any components yourself or replacing them with other values unless you were an electrician or engineer with the appropriate in-depth knowledge of the subject.

Nowadays, everyone seems to be screwing around with small amplifiers and changing components of which they neither know exactly how they work nor what exactly they do in the circuit.

It is conceivable that this sometimes results in a different "sound", as is the possibility that the different sound is due to a malfunction that was not intended by the developers.
 
You seldom hear people desolder their SOIC op-amp, so that's some food for thought.

Almost never hear people roll DAC chips too.

Maybe people have the self-awareness that if you swap DAC chips it will simply not work. But not op-amps. Somehow when you swap op-amps it only becomes better if the new op-amp is more expensive.
 
I have picked countless fake NE5532 OP-amps out of Asian products. If you change one of these for the right part, a TI made NE5532, you hear a huge and not only academic difference. The high end, that was grainy, suddenly get's crystal clear.
This real, audible change in sound may convince some people that some special OP-amp does sound better. Because it objectively does, compared to a Chinese fake part.
People never want to hear that most NE5532's in sub 100 Euro amps are fake. In fact you may be attacked from all sides if you say so.
I have no idea what is inside the fake chips, but they may be very simple and made for sensor buffering, but not audio.

If now someone demonstrates a difference with a boutique part, who can be 100% sure that the TI or BB "reference part" was not such a fake part?
 
Maybe it’s time for a fake vs. real measurement shootout :)

We can then checkout what are the differences…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

amirm
  • Poll Poll
Op-amp Rolling Using Sparkos on Fosi V3 Mono
16 17 18
Replies
348
Views
60K
Karmacoma
Karmacoma
amirm
  • Poll Poll
Sparkos SS3602 Opamp Rolling In Fosi P4
16 17 18
Replies
347
Views
48K
gino1961
G
pma
Op-amp Rolling Using AIYIMA A07
Replies
7
Views
1K
NotInYourHead
N
amirm
Does Op-amp Rolling Work? [Video]
6 7 8
Replies
146
Views
24K
solderdude
solderdude
J
Op Amp Replaced: Fosi V3 Monoblocks LM4562NA/NOPB $8x3
4 5 6
Replies
100
Views
6K
Salt
Salt
Back
Top Bottom