Test performance of AOP Burson/SPARKOS/SONIC994/1612, .....

[trl]

This document has been already mentioned in another thread: http://www.esstech.com/files/4514/4095/4306/Application_Note_Component_Selection_and_PCB_Layout.pdf, so it might worth posting here a bit of it:

​

It's clear that some opamps are measuring 2-3 dBs worse or better than others, in respect with THD and noise. Different measurements between opamps is a fact and it's also stated in every opamp's datasheet, but it's hard to say that few dBs in THD or in noise will actually make the audio chain to sound worse or better than another one.

One thing's for sure: pre-ringing and post-ringing is altering the sound, especially the first one, because it doesn't exists in the nature (there's only post-ringing), so if a DAC will pre-ring, then this might be felt as a different sound by some trained audiophiles (this will not appear in our standard THD & noise measurements). Let's wait a bit more, maybe some of us will be able to spot some differences between 2 devices in an A/B test, then will do some measurements and find some differences to post here.

 

[Julf]

One thing's for sure: pre-ringing and post-ringing is altering the sound, especially the first one, because it doesn't exists in the nature (there's only post-ringing), so if a DAC will pre-ring, then this might be felt as a different sound by some trained audiophiles (this will not appear in our standard THD & noise measurements).

Just because something "doesn't exist in nature" doesn't mean it is audible.

 

[Thomas savage]

Dose anybody realised how utterly pathetic grown men calling each other trolls etc comes across?

Can we grow up please.

 

[Veri]

@maty

I have blind tested vivid and plain NE5532. I first thought the Burson V6 Vivid sounded wider. When volume matched and blind tested, the differences disappeared. It sounded identical to an IC opamp, no "discrete" magic of any kind.

The Burson V6 Classic was impossible to blind test properly since it injected noise. Unless it was defect, the Classic injected much more distortion, and noise into the chain. An op-amp which wants badly to be a tube, if you will.

Anyway those were my experiences. Vivid equaled NE5532. Classic injected noise and distortion, if case one really wants to try and "tweak" sound via op-amp. The noise can be problematic with highly sensitive equipment like IEMs though.

 

[trl]

I found no difference when measuring my PLAYMATE with the few opamps tested: MUSES02, NE5532, LME49720, V6 Classic. Even the noise was about the same. However, with the V6 Vivid the volume was lower, so probably an incompatibility due to the opamps themselves (or something else I couldn't spot, but only tried them once).

In audio tests I couldn't spot much differences when switching between opamps in PLAYMATE, but when I did the same tests with PLAY differences were quite big, especially in background noise, but also in harmonics profile. Also in Matrix HPA-3B and ASUS Essence One I got audible differences too, especially on the background noise (Vivid was indeed..."vivid" and bright sounding).

I really think it's more about the surrounding components and power regulators than the actual opamps, at least on most scenarios.

 

[Veri]

In audio tests I couldn't spot much differences when switching between opamps in PLAYMATE, but when I did the same tests with PLAY differences were quite big, especially in background noise, but also in harmonics profile. Also in Matrix HPA-3B and ASUS Essence One I got audible differences too, especially on the background noise (Vivid was indeed..."vivid" and bright sounding).

I really think it's more about the surrounding components and power regulators than the actual opamps, at least on most scenarios.

I tested with a Burson SWING. No op-amp made any noise difference, except the V6 Classic.

There's the possibility the V6 Classic I received were broken though somehow. or as you say, compatibility issue.

 

[Thomas savage]

Iv moved a bunch of matys off topic stuff out to a new thread

@maty , I'm at my wit's end with your off topic posts . Putting 'off topic' at the top and 'end of off topic' at the bottom is as ridiculous as it is ineffective.

Next time I see this you will get a thread ban , you want to start a new topic , start a new thread.

You've been told enough times.

 

[maty]

Several comments back (now deleted) I asked for a new thread to be opened or to participate in two other existing ones in other forums. I was ignored, that is why I responded here.

I already wish you were more motivated when I suffer personal scorn.

- The End -

 

[Julf]

I was ignored

There is a reason...

 

[Thomas savage]

Several comments back I asked for a new thread to be opened or to participate in two other existing ones in other forums. I was ignored, that is why I responded here.

I already wish you were more motivated when I suffer personal scorn.

- The End -

And why can't you start the new thread ? It's you that starts the off topic then you ask others to start a new thread and if that's not enough ask for the off topic stuff you started to migrate to another audio forum all together , seems totally bonkers to me.


Maty you want to post bonkers stuff and behave in bizarre ways you can expect some push back from members . You don't like that alter your behaviour or don't come here. Either way I'm not telling you again.

Well I started the new thread thanks to the help of another member , maty decided to delete the title and a bunch of his posts making all that work worthless.

He's now enjoying a ASR holiday.

 

[Nango]

New kid on the block ........ Sparko's entry in headphone amping:

https://sparkoslabs.com/aries-headphone-amplifier-and-preamp/

.... lacks the "Made in ...."-Label but comes with "Risk Free 30 day In Home Auditions" .... this was done for you @amirm !!!!

 

[JohnYang1997]

New kid on the block ........ Sparko's entry in headphone amping:
https://sparkoslabs.com/aries-headphone-amplifier-and-preamp/

base model 2495 full model 2995
lol
I was expecting 1000+, turned out to be 2000+ even close to 3000 for full model.

 

[Nango]

base model 2495 full model 2995
lol
I was expecting 1000+, turned out to be 2000+ even close to 3000 for full model.

WOW ... ok ... delete, delete, delete .....

 

[JohnYang1997]

WOW ... ok ... delete, delete, delete .....

I'm actually curious how it stack up against hpa4 or monoprice 887.

 

[trl]

This really looks high-end inside:
- MU metal shielded transformer
- LCD panel with touchscreen (quite expensive stuff, probably the first ever headamp with such option)
- relays volume adjust
- balanced inputs
- no opamps (just discrete), no caps in signal path
- very high bandwidth
- DC protection
- 0.1 Ohms output impedance

However, the price is indeed very high, but I hope they will come up with a much cheaper version, without relays (just a 2-gangs potentiometer) and no LCD and OPA1612 instead of the expensive discrete Sparko's opamps. After all, we're mostly looking for best price/performance ratio headamp.

 

[Sam Spade]

New kid on the block ........ Sparko's entry in headphone amping:

https://sparkoslabs.com/aries-headphone-amplifier-and-preamp/

.... lacks the "Made in ...."-Label but comes with "Risk Free 30 day In Home Auditions" .... this was done for you @amirm !!!!

View attachment 41504

I have one with the balanced preamp option, fed by a Chord Qutest and driving LCDxc and LCD4s and a Class A Marantz PM80 and Dynaudio image 1 two way bookshelf speakers. The combination is simply sublime. and as the modding I would consider is burson or Sparko, and its already full of Sparko's best components, I'm not even tempted to take the lid off

It is on my desk in my home office, I wish it had a remote, as I wish the Qutest did too. But on my desk it doesn't matter it's at arms length.

Also Andrew Sparko is a dead set legend and great to deal with. And I have no idea how a company of 2 people and a dog can produce a unit that competes with the best, companies with massive R&D and lots of staff.

It is US$3,000 and it is worth every cent.

John Darko says: Chord's Qutest is *the* DAC to beat at $2K

So my combo is US$5K RRP. In Aussie dollars it is substantially more. AU$6,400

If they had remotes i'd probably have two....... BUT

In my main system I have a Burson Conductor 3X reference. I absolutely love it. It has a remote and is an awesome DAC, head amp and preamp. US$2144. It is 1/3 the price in one beautiful case that is an excellent piece of industrial design. The Burson appears to have more power. That shows you how remarkable the Burson products are, just outstanding value. And the subjective differences, well the two combos are great. The Sparko/Qutest is more detailed, without being analytical. It is just pure and so musical. But I could die happy with the Burson only, it is so good.

I've sat down to compare both combos a number of times and I just end up giggling happily listening away, thinking that engaging my analytical brain is too much effort, and music above all is an emotional experience, and I should just enjoy it. So I do LOL.

But this thread is about opamps. I have tried a pair of Sparko dual pros in The LP stage of my burson as proof of concept and I think they sound better. The sparkos footprint is 4x the burson, but they are flatter, maybe 1/4 the height. I just need to work out a solution where I can put the lid back on without shorting anything

 

[NormB]

This document has been already mentioned in another thread: http://www.esstech.com/files/4514/4095/4306/Application_Note_Component_Selection_and_PCB_Layout.pdf, so it might worth posting here a bit of it:

View attachment 34439

​

It's clear that some opamps are measuring 2-3 dBs worse or better than others, in respect with THD and noise. Different measurements between opamps is a fact and it's also stated in every opamp's datasheet, but it's hard to say that few dBs in THD or in noise will actually make the audio chain to sound worse or better than another one.

One thing's for sure: pre-ringing and post-ringing is altering the sound, especially the first one, because it doesn't exists in the nature (there's only post-ringing), so if a DAC will pre-ring, then this might be felt as a different sound by some trained audiophiles (this will not appear in our standard THD & noise measurements). Let's wait a bit more, maybe some of us will be able to spot some differences between 2 devices in an A/B test, then will do some measurements and find some differences to post here.

Wow. Real noob here, although I HAVE slept in several hotels in my lifetime…

Actually, I’ve recently begun “playing” with opamps in an ADCOM GFP-565 preamp.

Going from stock to an OPA134 in the gain stage was a real wakeup (as was recapping, Nichicon UKA series), I have a set of OPA604’s I’ll try next, but looking over your list several pages back, the LT1028 or OPA627 (pricey) look promising. ADCOM uses them for the phono section (presumably for VERY low noise figure, gain, etc) but are they circuit compatible for the gain section?

I’ll take a second look, but thought I’d go ahead and ask.

thanks in advance.

 

[trl]

You may try what ESS recommends for I/V stage (AD797) or what most ESS DAC's manufacturers are using these days in I/V stage: OPA1612. Nevertheless, when you swap opamps, you need an oscilloscope and do some measurements prior vs. after the swap; this will limit the reasons for unwanted oscillations.