opa1656 in front end of FOSI V3 Mono

[pma]

Replacing the stock 5532 with something as fast as an OPA1656 on a DIP adapter is inviting trouble. Next time try OPA2891 for even more trouble ;-)
Rolling OpAmps is plain silly and should never be done by lay-people who have zero clue of what's going on under the hood of a circuit.

This is the key, guys are swapping op-amps without understanding datasheet information, without having an idea about Bode plots, without oscilloscope measurements to check stability and without proper measurements of distortion plots. Often with SMD parts in PCB DIP adapters. The result is then as the one described here in post #1. This is not a children playground. But our warnings are hopeless, they do not care about expert opinions.

 

[DACsNoMore]

This is the key, guys are swapping op-amps without understanding datasheet information, without having an idea about Bode plots, without oscilloscope measurements to check stability and without proper measurements of distortion plots. Often with SMD parts in PCB DIP adapters. The result is then as the one described here in post #1. This is not a children playground. But our warnings are hopeless, they do not care about expert opinions.

I was shocked the manufacturers are advertising opamp rolling, it is ok to mention swappable DIP sockets (folks who are looking for this would appreciate it). Hm, but then they make a good money from reselling SparkoS and Burson, so it is worse the risk as those cost more than amps. One should really have an insertion tool for DIP8 packaging IC (the pins are spread a little - it makes it very difficult to insert as pins and holes are not aligned), anti-static wrist band at minimum. The SMD mounted IC on DIP8 adapters are actually the easiest to insert as pins are straight and perfectly aligned.

 

[A Very Private Zootopia]

I’m speaking from the position of someone who has learned by actually breaking things.

I’ve damaged and repaired some amplifiers, not out of carelessness, but out of curiosity and hands-on learning.
From that perspective, I find the dismissive attitude of some skeptics — phrases like “there is no point” or “you’re chasing fairies” — rather unhelpful in a hobby context.

Measured insignificance and personal experimentation are not the same question.
Audio is a hobby, not a production line. The goal is not always optimization, but understanding.

Blowing an op-amp into oscillation teaches you why stability matters.
Killing an amp teaches you respect for power supply design.
Learning that a “faster” part is not automatically better comes from experience, not graphs.

For some, these experiments may be pointless.
For others, each failure becomes a reference point that informs the next attempt.
That process has value, even when the audible difference is small or nonexistent.

Saying “it makes no difference” may be correct in a measurement sense,
but it does not invalidate the act of experimenting itself.

In a hobby space, curiosity and trial-and-error deserve as much respect as conclusions.

"Breaking an amplifier through experimentation is nothing.
Doing nothing at all is what’s truly meaningless."

 

[NTK]

I’m speaking from the position of someone who has learned by actually breaking things.

I’ve damaged and repaired some amplifiers, not out of carelessness, but out of curiosity and hands-on learning.
From that perspective, I find the dismissive attitude of some skeptics — phrases like “there is no point” or “you’re chasing fairies” — rather unhelpful in a hobby context.

Measured insignificance and personal experimentation are not the same question.
Audio is a hobby, not a production line. The goal is not always optimization, but understanding.

Blowing an op-amp into oscillation teaches you why stability matters.
Killing an amp teaches you respect for power supply design.
Learning that a “faster” part is not automatically better comes from experience, not graphs.

For some, these experiments may be pointless.
For others, each failure becomes a reference point that informs the next attempt.
That process has value, even when the audible difference is small or nonexistent.

Saying “it makes no difference” may be correct in a measurement sense,
but it does not invalidate the act of experimenting itself.

In a hobby space, curiosity and trial-and-error deserve as much respect as conclusions.

"Breaking an amplifier through experimentation is nothing.
Doing nothing at all is what’s truly meaningless."

I'd disagree. The value of breaking things is to learn and to understand why they broke. How many "op-amp rollers" have the necessary technical knowledge, or are interested in acquiring it, to understand how reactive loads interact with the functioning of amplifiers, the controls system theory behind stability criteria and stability margins, how to devise compensation techniques to enhance stability, and how to determine the safe operation areas, etc.

Otherwise, what can "hobbyists" learn from op-amp rolling? Some lift veils and some put more on? Do they even know how to use an oscilloscope to check if the amp oscillates? Do they even have the schematic of the amp or do they just roll their op-amps without being bothered to read one?

May be those who actually know how those things work also know where else to better spend their time on?

 

[A Very Private Zootopia]

I'd disagree. The value of breaking things is to learn and to understand why they broke. How many "op-amp rollers" have the necessary technical knowledge, or are interested in acquiring it, to understand how reactive loads interact with the functioning of amplifiers, the controls system theory behind stability criteria and stability margins, how to devise compensation techniques to enhance stability, and how to determine the safe operation areas, etc.

Otherwise, what can "hobbyists" learn from op-amp rolling? Some lift veils and some put more on? Do they even know how to use an oscilloscope to check if the amp oscillates? Do they even have the schematic of the amp or do they just roll their op-amps without being bothered to read one?

May be those who actually know how those things work also know where else to better spend their time on?

There is no qualification required to swap an op-amp.

This is a hobby, not a licensed profession. Curiosity does not need credentials, and learning often begins with hands-on experience rather than complete theoretical understanding.

Op-amp rolling is a modest, low-risk activity — closer to casual tinkering than serious experimentation. If an amplifier fails in the process, no one is harmed; only hardware is affected. For that reason, it seems unnecessary to judge such exploration by professional standards.

Technical knowledge is valuable, but it does not grant moral authority over how others choose to enjoy their hobby. Discouraging curiosity helps no one.

 

[A Very Private Zootopia]

There is no qualification required to swap an op-amp.

This is a hobby, not a licensed profession. Curiosity does not need credentials, and learning often begins with hands-on experience rather than complete theoretical understanding.

Op-amp rolling is a modest, low-risk activity — closer to casual tinkering than serious experimentation. If an amplifier fails in the process, no one is harmed; only hardware is affected. For that reason, it seems unnecessary to judge such exploration by professional standards.

Technical knowledge is valuable, but it does not grant moral authority over how others choose to enjoy their hobby. Discouraging curiosity helps no one.

From my own experience, the only time I have ever damaged an amplifier while op-amp rolling was a single mistake where an op-amp was inserted backwards. Even then, the damage was minor and easily repairable.

Trying different op-amps does not change the world, nor does it pose any inherent danger.
Presenting op-amp rolling as a risky activity that beginners should avoid altogether feels exaggerated.

In reality, op-amp rolling is one of the simplest and most accessible things a beginner can do.
It is precisely because it is low-risk and easy that many people start there — not because they claim expertise, but because they are curious.

 

[Svend P]

From my own experience, the only time I have ever damaged an amplifier while op-amp rolling was a single mistake where an op-amp was inserted backwards. Even then, the damage was minor and easily repairable.

Trying different op-amps does not change the world, nor does it pose any inherent danger.
Presenting op-amp rolling as a risky activity that beginners should avoid altogether feels exaggerated.

In reality, op-amp rolling is one of the simplest and most accessible things a beginner can do.
It is precisely because it is low-risk and easy that many people start there — not because they claim expertise, but because they are curious.

People on ASR are only against it because it is a waste of time. It will not give any improvement to the sound. It is a fruitless endeavor

Does Op-amp Rolling Work?

When I post my last video on review of Douk A5 amplifier, I mentioned that rolling (changing) op-amp ICs in there is fruitless. I got have a dozen comments under that video in youtube asking why so I thought I experiment again with the A5. Note that I have done the same testing with both DACs...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Mnyb]

And it can’t be learned trough random experiments, you must learn the actual theory and practice.

Assume that if you can’t understand and design the whole circuit/amplifier you can’t improve it .

 

[A Very Private Zootopia]

You don’t know others, and you don’t get to decide what they should study or how they should learn. That choice is theirs. No one gives you the right to do that.

Given how strict your definition of “valid learning” is, I assume you personally can design a complete audio system from scratch.
Realistically, how many people in the ASR community can actually design an entire amplifier on their own?

I’m improving myself by self-studying and modifying amplifiers as part of my own process. Not just to improve an amp.
None of my time is wasted.

If someone feels the need to label how others spend their time as a “waste of time,” that often says more about how they value their own time than anything else.

Modifying amplifiers is not an experiment, and it doesn’t have to produce some meaningful or noble outcome.

It’s simply something people choose to do.
The problem here isn’t methodology. It’s the tendency to over-romanticize audio, treat music listening as something sacred, and then use that attitude to judge others.

 

[solderdude]

You don’t know others, and you don’t get to decide what they should study or how they should learn. That choice is theirs. No one gives you the right to do that.

That (having the right to decide what others do) 'we' don't nor see it that way. The choice people make and their money is theirs. 'We' do not decide anything 'they' should do or not do. The reader/experimenter/swapper decides that.
All that 'we' can do is tell (warn) people, certainly the non-initiated in electronics, that one can not simply 'swap' problem free and in this particular case all suitable op-amps will NOT lead to any improvements. This is simply because the op-amp is NOT the bottle neck in this particular amp (it performs better than the output stage). That does not mean that there are no benefits to be had in other applications/equipment.

Given how strict your definition of “valid learning” is, I assume you personally can design a complete audio system from scratch.

I can and did and do.

Realistically, how many people in the ASR community can actually design an entire amplifier on their own?

A handfull maybe a bit more. Whenever they tell you it is pointless and you might even break your amp it serves as a warning to those that don't really know what they are doing and 'swap' because they believe or are being told there is something to gain in sound quality. Not in increasing hands-on experience.

I’m improving myself by self-studying and modifying amplifiers as part of my own process. Not just to improve an amp.
None of my time is wasted.

That's a great cause and your time is not wasted here.

If someone feels the need to label how others spend their time as a “waste of time,” that often says more about how they value their own time than anything else.

Ermmm no ...as explained above.

Modifying amplifiers is not an experiment, and it doesn’t have to produce some meaningful or noble outcome.

It IS an experiment, educated or not it IS experimentation. The goal of such endeavors generally is to improve (perceived) performance. In some rare occasions some people might only do this for 'educational' purposes and is O.K. if the device breaks as then the challenge will be to fix it (and learn).
In the vast majority of 'op-amp swapping' cases the goal is NOT to learn what not to to or might not be the best choice but the goal is to improve the 'sound quality' without factual confirmation but by simply 'having a preference'. The latter may or may not be based on actual changes to the output signal that reach audible levels.

It’s simply something people choose to do.

Yep, that's fine. Doing so without knowing the risks or hindered by any knowledge of electronics might mean loss of money. Hobbies cost money so that may or may not be an issue.
Gaining the 'wrong' knowledge also is not desirable but will only harm your wallet and time. Also no problem and could be fun.
'We', however, do not really support it.
It is like saying.... You don't need to go to or listen to some doctor if you have some (serious) condition... just use this or that remedy as it helped for me (placebo or not).

Sure.. you are not going to die and chances are that aside from some device (including connected speakers/headphones) might be destroyed, however small the risk, you are just out of money (and a hobby costs money).

When one is O.K. with that (small risk) and don't mind if any 'perceived sound quality improvement' is real or not than go ahead an throw some money at it when this adds to the enjoyment of the hobby. Just don't go telling everyone here on ASR how the sound improved as if it were factual.
There are plenty of other places where you can do that.
Here on ASR it is seen as telling 'us' (engineers) we are 'wrong' because you and others have a different experience and clearly heard benefits.

The problem here isn’t methodology. It’s the tendency to over-romanticize audio, treat music listening as something sacred, and then use that attitude to judge others.

The problem is lack of factual knowledge, understanding of electronics and (psycho-acoustics) and relying solely on one's personal perception/enjoyment.
In the end... the latter is what it comes down to but... and here is the but ... one's personal perception and 'gained knowledge' are not facts. They only are (factual: seem to be) true for the 'observer'.

The problem thus is mistaking perception with facts. The used methodology is thus part of the problem.
A confounding problem is being human.... being butt-hurt when one does not agree or misinterpret information given by others and mistaking non-sense for truth.
This is true for all humans... being ASR member or not.

 

[Mnyb]

And it can’t be learned trough random experiments, you must learn the actual theory and practice.

Assume that if you can’t understand and design the whole circuit/amplifier you can’t improve it .

You don’t know others, and you don’t get to decide what they should study or how they should learn. That choice is theirs. No one gives you the right to do that.

Given how strict your definition of “valid learning” is, I assume you personally can design a complete audio system from scratch.
Realistically, how many people in the ASR community can actually design an entire amplifier on their own?

I’m improving myself by self-studying and modifying amplifiers as part of my own process. Not just to improve an amp.
None of my time is wasted.

If someone feels the need to label how others spend their time as a “waste of time,” that often says more about how they value their own time than anything else.

Modifying amplifiers is not an experiment, and it doesn’t have to produce some meaningful or noble outcome.

It’s simply something people choose to do.
The problem here isn’t methodology. It’s the tendency to over-romanticize audio, treat music listening as something sacred, and then use that attitude to judge others.

I was merely suggested more guided focused learning .

For example PMA who responded earlier in this tread can probably design an amp in his sleep ( or may already done so ) ,a real expert

I would not swap components in any product before being able to at least understand rudimentary circuit design and read the service manual if existing .
I would start practicing on repairing stuff and build kits simultaneously as i would go trough some university course equivariant irl or online or by other means by textbooks on the subject ?

It's incredible ineffective to do "learning by burning" even if it gives valuable life lessons

The catch is by acquiring some knowledge you probably would come to the conclusion , maybe the effort of swapping OP in this particular product is not worth it and the suitable alternative OP's would yield similar performance ?

 

[A Very Private Zootopia]

What I’m saying is much simpler than it’s being made out to be.
“Plug-and-play” op-amp rolling is not something that deserves to be framed with a grand term like experimentation.

It feels like far too much meaning is being projected onto a very small, low-level action.
Whatever motivation someone has for doing it, regulating that behavior or collectively mocking it seems excessive.

"Please don’t respond to claims I never made."

Designing an amplifier is not some mythical skill reserved for a select few. With proper education, many people can do it.
Also I’m interested in learning amplifier design, but most people simply aren’t. And that’s okay.

Lastly, if I were in your position, I would at least consider whether the limitation lies not in people’s experiences, but in the measurement methods being used.

 

[Svend P]

but in the measurement methods being used.

Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?

Seems like so many review threads get challenged with: 1. Measurements are not everything. 2. You all never listen. 3. I trust my ears, not graphs. 4. I don't listen to graphs. I listen to music. 5. You all must not listen to music at all. 6. Why don't you all buy the best SINAD gear? 7...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Mnyb]

No it’s not a mythical skill for the select few , but just the one needed to asses what will happen ?

 

[DavidR]

No it’s not a mythical skill for the select few , but just the one needed to asses what will happen ?

What I like more about ASR is how often I learn "why" something happened, not "what" will happen.

 

[Mnyb]

What I like more about ASR is how often I learn "why" something happened, not "what" will happen.

I think can be both what and why sometimes

 

[solderdude]

What I’m saying is much simpler than it’s being made out to be.
“Plug-and-play” op-amp rolling is not something that deserves to be framed with a grand term like experimentation.

Even though it IS experimenting ?

It feels like far too much meaning is being projected onto a very small, low-level action.
Whatever motivation someone has for doing it, regulating that behavior or collectively mocking it seems excessive.

That it is.
Telling people it is rather pointless in this particular case is simply informing those people from a technical P.O.V.
If they want to do it anyway is their choice.
Reporting how good this or that op-amp 'sounds' is misleading and not based on the S part in ASR.

"Please don’t respond to claims I never made."

Designing an amplifier is not some mythical skill reserved for a select few. With proper education, many people can do it.
Also I’m interested in learning amplifier design, but most people simply aren’t. And that’s okay.

Yep proper education ... The vast majority of op-amp rollers is NOT educated in electronics and just puts op-amps in there others claim has magical better sounding properties.
It has nothing to do with education nor learning but all with experimenting and (rather pointless) subjective observations.

Lastly, if I were in your position, I would at least consider whether the limitation lies not in people’s experiences, but in the measurement methods being used.

The limitation lies in the methodology how the 'sound of op-amps' is determined.
The measurements are very clear about this.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

I’ve damaged and repaired some amplifiers, not out of carelessness, but out of curiosity and hands-on learning

“He that breaks a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.” Gandalf to Saruman

 

[solderdude]

“He that breaks a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.” Gandalf to Saruman

LOL..

I have accidentally destroyed an amp when simply trying to measure the voltage on the base pin of an output transistor, slipped the probe and shorted the B and C
So aside from leaving the path of wisdom clumsiness is also a way to break things.
Of course ... doing that (measuring probe on the B) is kind of straying from the path of wisdom to begin with.

 

[voodooless]

So aside from leaving the path of wisdom clumsiness is also a way to break things.

This is probably a fitting video

But even from clumsiness, eventually, you'll learn

I would at least consider whether the limitation lies not in people’s experiences, but in the measurement methods being used.

Considered and dismissed until proven otherwise.