OpAmp replacement on PC soundcard (and maybe the ClockGen.) - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / beginners

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 am
content: Hello everyone! and hello Dave!There has been a trend in the past few years of modding sound cards by replacing the OpAmps, capacitors, and even the quartz clock generator with an ultra-precision TCXO 1ppm (or even 0.3ppm) of the same frequency as the original (in this case 24.576Mhz). And all of this was said to have VERY good audible results.Problem is, after a while some of the cards started experiencing problems.. ranging from crackling noises in the speakers, to just plain dying.Now.. it's not to say that some of the unmodded ones haven't had problems on their own (i'm talking about the CREATIVE X-Fi series, btw), BUT i just want to do things as best as i can while getting a bit more out of my X-Fi Elite Pro.a picture here>>http://www.ixbt.com/multimedia/creative/x-fi/card-big.jpgWhat i'm mainly interested in, is changing the 4 original dual OpAmps (1x NJM2114 for front + 3x NJM2068 for surround), with 4x OPA1602AID dual OpAmps. Some also suggested to put a 0.1uF ceramic capacitor on the V+/V- of each of the 4 opamps as a little backup power or something, as it would help normalise the sound.http://www.njr.com/semicon/PDF/NJM2114_E.pdf- original fronthttp://www.njr.com/semicon/PDF/NJM2068_E.pdf- original surroundhttp://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/opa1604.pdf- replacement for front+surround(At first, the LM4562 was used as a good replacement, but as time passed, more and more opamps were tried, and "OPA1602AID" was said to be one of the best sounding on these cards.)Voltage-wise the OPA1602AID seems ok ..i'm thinking nothing on that sound card is going to go above 12 volts, so i'm well within limits.. but more than that, i have no clue. So please, i really need some help on weather or not this swap us fully compatible and is not going to kill my card after some time.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 06:42:33 am
content: oh no, is this the dire level audiophoolery and sunk too, can't they just stick to playing with gold connectors

author: tron9000
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 08:22:35 am
content: ok, well lets get a base-line:how much do you know about op-amps?IMHO: Creative have been making soundcards for a flipping long time! they know what they're doing when it comes to audio - so why mod the card? its as good as!As far as the 0.1uF caps go, they should be already on there! any half decent EE knows to plonk on coupling caps for each IC's supply line.

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:12:51 am
content: frankly, not much.. that's why i'm hereI hate to bash on Creative because i still have a fondness for them (for some reason), but i don't think they know what they are doing, for the past 10 years.Problems with the X-Fi series arose from the start, when they used jamicon capacitors and they started blowing up.. so ppl changed them all to audio grade ones.. afterwards discovering that the sound was improved... (this is basically how the MOD "culture" started around these cards)The Elite Pro also had problems right from the box; on some computers the cards couldn't even be installed... on others, the audio processor fried within the first year or two. And was fixed with an official revision upgrade, new firmware + radiator.And if that's not all, some of the crap G-Luxon CAPs still bulge up... And then there were bad win7 drivers...So no, i don't think Creative knows what the **** they're doing. And this was on their premium 400$+ sound card, and they barely made a better one 6 years later. Barely..The NJM2114 & NJM2068 are older than the internet. The only reason they were used, is because they're dirt cheap (and were not as crappy as NJM4556 on the x-fi Extreme Music)... And yes, they sound like crap. Gorgeous DACs sitting next to poo-nugget-grade opamps.My question isn't if upgrades will sound good; i already know the answer to that question. (Even the LM4562 sounded superb next to the stock opamps.) My question is about compatibility; what is safe and what isn't..... from an electronical point of view, what could be done, and what are no-no's.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 10:30:37 am
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 09:12:51 amThe NJM2114 is a very good sounding opamp, very different from the majority of Japanese opamps (most of these, including NJM2068, are the "LM833 topology" based, with p-n-p BJTs on the inputs). The NJM2114 is essentially a dual NE5534 and IMHO better than the NE5532. I won't change these for LM4562 etc. A 100nF capacitor (preferably P/P film) directly between supply pins does improve the sound noticeably in my experience (it is a useful trick especially for the NE5532/5534/NJM2114 topology).CheersAlex

author: tron9000
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 10:36:48 am
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 09:12:51 amHow can you say that you know it'd sound better with a different op-amp if you just said you know "not much" about op-amps then?QuoteI'm starting to think Simon was right...my advice: do what you want.

author: LukeW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 01:09:23 pm
content: "And all of this was said to have VERY good audible results."Maybe you should replace that crystal with a cesium beam tube while you're at it.Or get one of those AOpen AX4B-533 vacuum tube motherboards.

author: Messtechniker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 03:54:53 pm
content: Quote from: LukeW on October 29, 2015, 01:09:23 pmWhen done please upload two files "before" and "after" the mod without tellingwhich is which so that we may judge for ourselves without too much bias.By the way, bias can even be caused by the file sequence itself. We are deep in to psychology here.Usually the outcome will be "no statistically significant difference". This can be so because the test signalwill have passed though a number of "horrible stages" before hitting your mod or the mod effect is soslight that the results are below our threshold of hearing.Anyway try and learn to discern between facts and voodoo.Yours - Messtechniker

author: tron9000
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 03:58:32 pm
content: I like that idea!ball in your court Foxer!

author: Kleinstein
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 04:26:41 pm
content: The NJM2114 is allready a good quallity audio OP. It depends on the circuit wether the OPA1602 will be better or worse. The only definite advantiage is that it runs on much lower supply current. Voltage noise is lower, but current noise is considerably higher. A higher bandwidth may be good, but may also lead to oscillation in some circuits.With audio inside a PC, the more critical part will likely be shiedling and HF filtering. So extra filtering at the suplly can improve things, but depending in the board, just adding an extra a 100 nF low loss capacitor can even make things worse. Often ceramic caps are better than film type for decoupling - more loss and smaller case.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 06:11:23 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 09:12:51 amYou are hearing what you want to hear, not reality.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 06:28:15 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 09:12:51 amAudio grade capacitors ? wow, what are they, like the best you can get, gee some people must be thinking they are living on the edge with 20KHz, wonder how the poor designers of 1MHz switch mode power supplies cope never mind the RF people. MOD culture ? yep says it all, I guess it's cheaper and more to brag about than spending £ 1000 on a cable made by nude virgins.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 06:29:00 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on October 29, 2015, 06:11:23 pm+1, I laugh at those who claim to be to able distinguish particular opamp sound in the circuit. Yet for modding they still keep buying counterfeit opamps from ebay which usually are much worse than original ones. And their golden ears can hear those warm fuzzy improvements, regardless of crap counterfeit opamps.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 06:55:46 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amHello back!Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amThe trend is because the woowoo promoters have lost the battle about digital and are attacking with more magic potions. Please don't take the other comments personally in this thread. It is just that we have all seen these kinds of unscientific black magic claims many times before. None of the things claimed are backed up by anything other than wishful thinking of the people who "hear" these amazing differences. Some audio forums have even banned talk about ABX testing as it proves them wrong. There is nothing real to be gained by replacing the op amps in normal use. Capacitors, maybe, if they have failed or are of poor quality, which many are. Clocks? A total waste of time as already mentioned.Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amHave fun and change what you want. Make sure you don't fool yourself that it is making a difference for the good. Some people love single ended 300B tube amps pushing 2 watts into horn loaded single driver speakers. They sound good to them because of the distortion, not because of the lack of it.Make some real measurements of the performance of your sound card before you make the changes, and then again after. That will be the real proof you have improved it, not the fallible human ear and brain.

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 07:06:16 pm
content: Thank you all for your replies!@Alex NikitinI don't want to use the LM4562; that was just used as a replacement in the beginning (as far back as the audigy4), but was mostly used to replace the NJM4556 in the "X-Fi extreme Music" & "Fatal1ty".The NJM2114 may be ok for some applications, but on this sound card it makes the music sound (in some cases) worse than my old Audigy2 and not as "straight".. To put it more blunt, although there is more depth in the X-Fi E.P, i have to compensate using the equalizer to not make my head hurt. I't as if the equalizer has been messed with on this card, it doesn't sound "straight".. And it also lacks the detail that i know the CA20K1 sound chip and the good onboard DACs can produce. So 2x LT1028ACN8 or 2x AD797BRZ or 1x AD8599 or preferably OPA1602AID; these are kind of the candidates, (i'm not thinking of using the LM4562).The 5534 you mentioned, was used though as a "2xSingle" replacement by the Elfidelity Lab who completly redesigned the X-Fi E.P. and resold it as basically an X-Fi on steroidshttp://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/ODAwWDgwMA==/z/OocAAOSwpDdVI5HL/$_57.JPG... So i dunno... there might be potential there..(And regarding the 100nF film capacitor.. is WIMA a good choice for the brand?)Thanks!@blueskullThe TCXO brings almost the best improvement if you can believeIt makes all the different sounds a lot more distinguishable and not mixed with each other. Maybe it has to do with the more precise "cues" it gives.. I don't know what to tell you more, but EVERYONE who tried the new crystal was blown away by what a big difference it made. And not only on these sound cards, but in other audio applications also. It makes what you hear, clear.I don't know the science behind it (again, that's why i'm here).The card is true 24 bit though..@MesstechnikerBelieve me there is nothing more that i would like to do than record a before and after... not to impress people, but to check for myself.. if i had the proper recording equipment.In any case, i didn't come here to try and convince anybody.. i'm just looking for some advice from an electronical point of view and hands-down experience."Usually the outcome will be "no statistically significant difference". This can be so because the test signalwill have passed though a number of "horrible stages" before hitting your mod or the mod effect is soslight that the results are below our threshold of hearing."What if the only horrible sound stage is that opamp and a few crappy capacitors? And the rest of the soundcard is solid.. What if?...LITERALLYEVERYONEwho has replaced the opamps on the Audigy4 & X-Fi's said it was like night & day. That has to mean something.What i don't understand is why most people here aren't able to provide the proper answer to my somewhat simple questions (thanks moderator for "warm" welcome), but instead trying to derail me from even thinking of doing these otherwise simple swaps..@KleinsteinI know that sadly it's heavily dependent on the rest of the circuit.. that's why i'm not leaning towards the best most expensive opamps known, but towards what has been done before on this circuit by other people with good results. And the OPA1602AID sudgestion came from a very level-headed fellow who mods cards for years.I just wanted to know if it may fry my card after some time... because i just got the card and planing to keep it for a long time.Same with the TCXO mod.. if there are dangers.Some other mods i had in plan were:-An EMI shields (with grounding) on certain chips/IC's, and a grounded shield for the whole card-Swapping the main power capacitor for a bigger one (curently 220uF 16v G-Luxon that is known to crap out) looking to replace with ELNA Silmic II 1500-2200uF 16-25V + 1uF film + 0.1uF film, all 3 in parallel. (this upgrade is said to improve the lows/base)-Possibly replace other caps (maybe some with ceramic or film) if someone can swear they bring an improvement."So extra filtering at the suplly can improve things, but depending in the board, just adding an extra a 100 nF low loss capacitor can even make things worse"..Worse in what way?There has been said that the TCXO MOD and the power cap MOD affect one another, and kinda screwing with the base.. so with the TCXO it's better to go with a 1500uF or lower. (this is from trial an error)"The only definite advantiage is that it (OPA1602AID) runs on much lower supply current. Voltage noise is lower, but current noise is considerably higher. A higher bandwidth may be good, but may also lead to oscillation in some circuits."Could that affect the life of the board, or just the quality of the sound? (Later edit) : BTW the X-Fi operates the OpAmps at+12VDCOften ceramic caps are better than film type for decoupling - more loss and smaller case.Can you please expand on this? I don't really understand(The only place i heard the term "decoupling" on this board, are the decoupling CAPs for the OpAmps, which everyone is in a hurry to replace with ELNA Silmic II (of the same value).. but i suspect that might have some negative effects regarding the resistance, so i'm not looking to do it.)

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 07:56:21 pm
content: Honest post follows.If you don't know how to analyze the noise behaviour of a circuit, then you can't choose a better op amp.If you don't know the requirements on each amplifier stage, then you can't choose a different op amp anyway.If you don't know what decoupling capacitors do and in what way they interact with a circuit, then you can't reasonably choose "better" values or "better quality" capacitors.If you don't know a thing about digital signal processing and jitter (also phase noise) propagation in delta-sigma converters, you cannot possibly judge the impact of exchanging the clock source (which, just by the way, is very likely not the converters actual master clock, because that one will be synthesized by the audio codec from the main oscillator, and the chances are pretty awesome that this synthesizer is a lot worse in terms of phase noise than any crystal oscillator).My recommendation is to leave that sound card alone. Do something useful with your time instead (e.g. learn about electronics before trying to improve designs from actual engineers -because the latter is most certainly a waste of your time and resources).

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 08:12:55 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 07:06:16 pmI am but a normal user, the moderator status simply means that I am trusted and entrusted to deal with spam and sort out arguments where possible etc. It's not exactly in the job description to welcome people in and show them around and agree with what they want to do. I have a father inlaw who claims his special expensive hand made cables sound so much better and he can tell the difference I have to bite my lip any time i go to his house and he starts to brag.I have a shitty little amplifier off ebay, that when put through a pair of old 100W warfdale speakers (that I bought for a mere 50p) sounds like heaven, I'm guessing the good sound quality of the speakers make more of a difference than an amplifier that may or may not has a lower less than perceivable distortion or whatever the spec of the week is that everyone lusts after. I am reasonably happy with the performace of the 10W cheap panasonic speakers I usually run off the amplifier but can tell the difference.What are you listening to the music through ?What ever frequency your crystal is at it is a vastly higher frequency than the audio you are lusening to and a slight change in it will do absolutely nothing, its like saying that the frequency stability of your CPU will make a difference to siund quality.....

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 08:33:01 pm
content: For day to day and gaming i use a Logitech 5.1 system, and for quality audio listening purposes, i use an older PIONEER which sounds divine with 4x 3way big wooden speakers. And i don't think it's such an irrational assumption that the right OpAmp cand improve things. Especially when it's been done by others before in almost the same scenario with pleasing results.What do you make of thishttp://www.partsconnexion.com/burson/clock.html?

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 08:36:40 pm
content: Quote from: dom0 on October 29, 2015, 07:56:21 pmwhat about trial and error? especially if others already went through the process

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 08:57:30 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 08:36:40 pmThe thing is, you cannot objectively judge if it became better or worse without any real measurements. It might "sound better" in the next 2 minutes because you believe it will, slightly higher volume or whatever else. Also audible memory is so short that you actually don't remember how it sounded a few minutes ago. So unless it goes from awful to pretty good, you won't be able to distinguish. All your judgement will be mostly from how your brain works/imagination.QuoteOther clueless self deluded people. Believing that changing a single opamp in all the long way from recording to the speaker will greatly improve the sound.

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:13:58 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 08:36:40 pmTrial and error is only an engineering process if you can differentiate (e.g. by a measurement) the outcome. Trial and error without measuring is not a method, but stumbling around in the dark, neither knowing which direction you're headed nor knowing where you want to go.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:15:04 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 08:33:01 pmIn a word: BollocksQuoteThe best material ? nice and generic, oh good capacitors again, oh extra thick gold plated PCB ? what for ? extra thick does nothing it just allows you to carry more current, maybe they should make it 12oz copper, gold plating is just for corosion restistance, once soldered we don't give a rats fanny. Military resistors ? really ? please tell me about these, I design kit for military applications and should probably be using these instead of bog standard resistors that will work from -55C to 150C have a few ppm (like 100ppm and i can get picky if I like) and are easily obtainable in 0.1-1% tolerances. I see the word crystal suddenly vanished because they can't make the crystal any better. Clock jitter ? really, what is clock jitter then? I'm no expert but I think it refers to sporadic variation in speed, that is not what a crystal does, if they are that concerned about "jitter" why not just use a bog standard "clock crystal" usually they run at 32.768KHz (can you tell me why, go on, how does a clock work, think about it), if they need a higher frequency they can use a PLL like computer CPU's do, what can be more acurate than a crystal made to run a time peice, you know those things that drift (jitter ?) by so little that over the course of a year the time will only vary by minutes if not seconds - you do the math, and they cost pence.EDIT: sorrty forgot the holy grail of the "perfect square wave" seriously ? give me a fucking break. All a clock needs to do is produce a wave that goes high and lot at the right times, there is no "perfect wave" so long as it transitions "up" and "down" again the cpu it controls can work, it does nothing for performance, the whole point of digital is that your "perfect square wave" is not required, assuming you can make a perfect one.... Boy I'm in the wrong game, I could make more money out of fools that working for someone making kit that keeps military personael alive !

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:21:08 pm
content: QuoteA crystal isn't perfect ; it's Q is finite (albeit large, good crystals achieve 100 000+) and so it has phase noise. The time domain equivalent of phase noise is (random) jitter. So while the question isn't really "can we make a better oscillator than a bog standard crystal osc?", but "does it matter?". And the answer is, in this application, no.The most interesting feature of this high quality clock is undoubtedly the large metal can 80s TTL oscillator. These units are often worse in most aspects than a crystal and inverter.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:24:07 pm
content: Quote from: dom0 on October 29, 2015, 09:21:08 pmSo the frequency varies slightly you mean ? Yes of course as you say it still makes no difference, and like i said they won't be able to improve the quality of the crystal much. The variation in clock frequency will be so small that it's can't be perceived, else all of our films would be horribly out of sync.

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:26:50 pm
content: Yes, the frequency of every oscillator varies slightly, and even on different scales. So for example there are slow changes (i.e. time drift, temperature drift, crystal wear due to bad circuits with factor 10000000000 to high drive level) and then you have essentially random variations on every cycle duration, and that's your phase noise (in the frequency domain) or random jitter (in the time domain).

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:29:31 pm
content: Quote from: dom0 on October 29, 2015, 09:26:50 pmSo once that is divided down in the DSP most of the "jitter" will actually filter out. The drift will be slit and not perceivable.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 09:54:16 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 08:33:01 pmI can hardly believe it! A company that would take money from gullible people? Tell me it isn't so.Sorry for the sarcasm, but you will find it hard for people to be on the side of snake oil and rip off companies. If you want to believe, then believe and ignore everyone else. If you want to engage in a conversation on the subject on an engineering forum, then you can expect to need to support your claims with data and not references to wishful thinking people or to companies taking advantage of those people.And for a reference point from an AB test (not even ABX) I did in the early 90s with a preamp I made, my golden ear friends could not hear any difference between a TL072, NE5534, nor a LF356. They claimed they heard differences, even when I "changed" the op amp to same one.

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 10:26:48 pm
content: Ok so to cut everything short (because 2 days and a 2-page thread for 2 simple questions is getting a bit ridiculous), i'm rolling in snake oil, i'm sipping it with a straw.Will replacing the NJM2114 and the 3 NJM2068 on theanalog outputsof my X-Fi Elite pro sound card with 4 OPA1602AID have any impact on the lifespan of the card?also..Will replacing the stock 2-pin 24.576Mhz crystall with a 4-pin Ultra Precision TCXO 0.3ppm 24.576Mhz oscilator, conected like in this picturedo any damage in the long run??I know that with certain settings/setups, some anomalies like faster playback can occur:(copy-pasted from another forum)--"To me that happens<faster playback> if I select "bitmatched playback" and I forget to change in Windows the 48kHz samplerate to 44.1kHz. Don't know why there are not in sync when bitmatched is selected (but they are sync'ed when I force the sound card on a certain samplerate). But the speed difference is then 48/44.1...The value of 24.576MHz seems correct since it is 512 multiple of 48kHz (256 of 96kHz), and that's the native samplerates of X-Fi."--"Yes..that was it. Since i'm using ASIO as output, samplerate and masterclock varies dynamically. Weird thing that in my setup, if you ever play a 44100 track, there was no fallback for normal operation even you play a 48k track. You have to reboot. I just added SoX resampler to DSP list and everything seems fine.."Why does this happen? And how can i combat this?(A more recent variation of the MOD implies to not cancel any capacitor or any other part between the oscillator and x-fi chip. Just swap the 2-pin one for the 4-pin one and supply it with +3.3V or +5V.)

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 11:03:14 pm
content: vacuum tubes and gps disciplined clock oscillators !why ? because you can never be enough over-the-top

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 11:26:48 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 10:26:48 pmYes, if you damage it during replacing the op amps. Do you have experience replacing ICs? Do you have the right tools?Yes, if the new op amps oscillates. Do you have an oscilloscope to check this?

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2015, 11:43:43 pm
content: As just said, without seeing the schematic, or seeing some details of the circuit and working out some certain things, it can't said if changing what you want to change will cause problems or not. Probably not, if you know how to solder, unsolder, and follow some basic anti-static protocols. If you need to ask, then you don't have enough knowledge and are relying on everyone else here to research the data sheets and schematics, find a sound card and measure the voltages, etc.... just so you don't have to.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 07:34:13 am
content: Another voice to say, unless we know the circuit the opamp is in we can't tell. The crystal thing is pure hocus pokus, if you want to get ripped off be my guest.I suppose it will be square wheels on cars next.....

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 01:03:19 pm
content: I provided the schematics for all 3 opamps in the first post! And regarding the schematics for the X-Fi E.P. i think it's next to impossible to source out... So NO, i'm not relying on the people here to do the work that i could do; i was HOPING that the people here would help me with what i don't know/understandi.e. how to properly read the provided schematics for the opamps & compare them, or guide me to what measurements i should do and where! Plus maybe some other advises on how i could improve the sound (like howAlex Nikitinsaid about the 100pF film resistor on the voltage supply of the stock opamp). (edit: sorry, i ment to say 100nF cap.)(i don't have an oscilloscope, sadly)Been soldering since i was 5 y.o. , and i have replaced way smaller IC's. So it's ok

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 01:14:56 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 30, 2015, 01:03:19 pmYou basically don't need to read schematics of the opamps in most cases (they are simplified anyway). Consider opamp as a black box with input/output parameters specified. What matters is the circuit around it and how it works with those opamp parameters.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 01:34:50 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 30, 2015, 01:03:19 pm1) for a start, it is a 100nFfilm capacitor, not 100pF film resistor.2) Just to try my suggestion on NJM2014 first, before replacing any opamps. WIMA is OK, just use a smaller size capacitor (100nF 63V) .3) No, you can not replace a crystal with a clock module if you don't know where the clock input pin is on that chip.4) Don't expect 44.1kHz playback/recording to be any good at all on a card with the only 48/96/192kHz native sampling frequency. Not worth a hassle. If you are serious about the sound quality at 44.1kHz, at the very least find a card with a second crystal clock for that.5) Don't get upset by all this EE talk about the sound quality. There are very few good EEs who qualified to talk about the sound quality - these people do respect the subjective side of it and do not rush with suggestions about "objective measurements" and so on.CheersAlex

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 01:46:35 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 30, 2015, 01:03:19 pmNo you haven't provided the schematics for the sound card which is the important thing.Just replacing the op-amps is a silly thing to do. The circuit may be designed specifically to work with the original op-amp and changing it (even for a better op-amp on paper) could cause it to become unstable, oscillate which making it sound inferior and dissipate more power, therefore reducing its life.Quote from: Lightages on October 29, 2015, 09:54:16 pmThat's interesting. What sort of signal levels/impedance was the pre-amp amplifying?I have both heard and measured the difference in noise generated by a NE5532 and TL072 in a dynamic microphone pre-amp. It was a non-inverting configuration driving an inverting unity gain stage to give a balanced output. The power amplifier was differential amplifier with a gain of 1 followed by the TDA2003 power amplifier IC driving 50R headphones. The microphone's impedance was 200R, Rg = 43 & Rf = 2k2. The NE5532 was much better in this application than the TL072 which was noticeably more noisy.On a previous attempt I'd tried the same circuit with Rf = 1M & Rg = 18k but it was noisy with the NE5532 thanks not only to thermal noise but its high bias currents. The TL072 might have been less noisy in this configuration but I didn't test it.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 02:12:26 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on October 29, 2015, 09:54:16 pmI think this whole thing with op-amps got twisted somewhere along the line. In the late 80s and early 90s there were some expensive CD and laserdisc players that were severely compromised by really crappy op-amps on the output of top class DACs. Changing the op-amps had a huge effect there. From that point it ended up as a mantra that "there must always be an improvement to be had from a change of op-amps".

author: The Magic Rabbit
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 02:31:21 pm
content: As a computer systems tech, let me just make these points:Creative make great sound card FOR GAMING. They are miles behind the pro audio guys in terms of sound quality.If you want good sound quality, your best option is a sound card that uses either USB or FireWire link, preferably with an external power supply. If you get a bus powered card, get a good stable PSU.No amount of replacing caps or OP Amps is going to get you close to the quality improvement of just getting a better card. The quality difference is about component placement, design, isolation from interference, stability of power management, construction of the PCB itself... You can't change those things.My advice: by all means do it for interest or education, but don't kid yourself it will improve the card, you're far more likely to damage it either during the process or further down the line through poor soldering etc that can't handle the heat stress inside the case.Sent from my XT1039 using Tapatalk

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 02:42:00 pm
content: Quote from: The Magic Rabbit on October 30, 2015, 02:31:21 pmCreative's EMU division made great pro audio interfaces, but they've let that business rot and die.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 02:44:32 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 30, 2015, 02:12:26 pmUnfortunately, for audio DACs output filters the situation did not change since then.CheersAlex

author: The Magic Rabbit
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 02:44:48 pm
content: No, they didn't.E-MU were a brilliant manufacturer of synthesisers etc. until Creative bought them in 1993, to use their technology in their cards. Things went rapidly downhill from there.

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:10:14 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 01:34:50 pm@1 Yeah 100nF (0.1uF) cap, sorry, my mind got distracted@2 Don't you mean NJM2114 & NJM2068 ? (as they are the stock ones)@3 Well.. people used to connect it in place of the old one, soldering the output pin of the TCXO to the left contact point/hole where the old one used to be. So what you mean is that if done right, it should bypass the remaining circuitry for the old 2-pin clock? (I honestly have no clue what the differences between the 2-pin and the 4-pin clocks are, except maybe the 4-pin has something like a 2-pin clock + other components under the hood, that in the case of the stock one are spread across the PCB)@4 I think when the X-Fi Utility is switched to "Audio Creation Mode" and "Bit-Match Playback" is selected, it doesn't resample. I know the X-Fi solved many of the previous crappy resampling problems that plagued the Audigy series. But anyway, what i didn't understand is why in some cases the music plays faster with the TCXO.In any case, i don't consider myself an audiophile, but do care about things being done as right as they can be. Fact of the matter is, i didn't rush to order components from ebay or hotglue horse shit to my card, but first tried to look for answers and also question other people's experience on the subject of this MOD. I am familiar with electronics from averyyoung age but my experience is limited as i didn't pursue a career in this domain. So i do think people here should be a bit more forgiving and open minded to all the types of backgrounds that people come from, instead of pouring sarcasm like fireworks on new year's eve.Thanks Alex

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:15:28 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on October 30, 2015, 01:46:35 pmOk, this is a very good thing to know..So, as i don't have an osciloscope, my best bet would be to find someone with the same card and same opamp that i want & see how the card held up over the years..

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:33:11 pm
content: Quote from: The Magic Rabbit on October 30, 2015, 02:31:21 pmI 100% totally agree with you in every aspect!The reasons i bought this card are as follows:-my 12 y.o. audigy2 ... is... 12 years old... and i knew that some improvements have been made since then.-I wanted the sound sollution to still be inside the PC, while being the best i could afford.-The X-Fi elite pro is a very good card for gaming but also for music (and i don't think there has been something else like this done ever since, that focuses on both aspects)-It cost me the equivalent of 50 US $ for an almost unused card!! And that includes the external I/O box & all the accessories.So i'm not trying to fool myself in any way, i know what i bought, & i know it's limitations. The idea was/is to push those limitations a bit further.Plus to learn something new along the way.

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:34:33 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 30, 2015, 02:42:00 pmAlso true!(later edit)My cousin bought a creative sound system in 2001.. 4 satelites + sub with digital input, but is only a 4 channel system (not 4.1) ; and i swear, to this this day i don't get how it can sound so incredibly good and precise! I have never heard anything like it.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:38:51 pm
content: Quote from: The Magic Rabbit on October 30, 2015, 02:44:48 pmIn the mid 2000s the E-MU cards were still excellent products at reasonable prices. I have an E-MU 0404 USB that must be 8 to 10 years old, and its still working well. That was about the last good thing they did.

author: The Magic Rabbit
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:40:07 pm
content: Gaming cards are not good for music, and vice versa. For 50USD though, it's a good buy.The best advice, if you plan to use the card, would be to leave it alone. If you don't mind the occasional break down and trouble shooting, go for it.Personally, I'd rather have something working well, and being reliable, than something less reliable because I modified it, but that's me.Sent from my XT1039 using Tapatalk

author: The Magic Rabbit
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:41:17 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 30, 2015, 03:34:33 pmI had the same system. It was OK, but compared to my MOTU interface and Alesis monitors, they sound shit. LolSent from my XT1039 using Tapatalk

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 03:55:12 pm
content: ok.. so up until now, the only suggested mod here is the 0.1uF 63v WIMA Film CAP added to the +/- of the stock OpAmp...and of course some good shielding connected to GND can't hurt..(Anybody routing for changing some CAPs?)

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 05:33:28 pm
content: Quote from: The Magic Rabbit on October 30, 2015, 03:40:07 pmCare to explain?

author: The Magic Rabbit
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 05:48:06 pm
content: Quote from: dom0 on October 30, 2015, 05:33:28 pmSure!With gaming cards, the drivers mostly are geared towards 3D performance through DirectX/DirectSound. They tend to focus on performance within games, and the requirements are different. Typically drivers have large buffers so the sounds can be played without putting high demand on the CPU, because that frees it up for handling the graphics (with the graphics card) and actual game itself, such as tracking objects, networking, running the AI etc. Hardware is often geared more towards bass response too (gamers love it) and the cards don't often feature premium level ADC - generally they tend to have average quality inputs and more outputs.Music card is generally engineered with other objectives in mind. They focus on low latency performance, which puts more strain on the CPU, but offers quicker response with software synthesisers and MIDI hardware control. They also should easily be able to get down to 5ms or less combined input output, which means processors can be used for guitar amp simulations without any noticeable delay. Gaming cards tend to really struggle in that scenario. High end music cards also offer hardware sound channel mixing for zero latency monitoring, and usually have more inputs than outputs, sometimes offering support for 48 input and output channels. The focus is on sound quality, from the ground up, rather than anything else.There are cards that do both, but compromises always have to be made.Sent from my XT1039 using Tapatalk

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 06:13:12 pm
content: @The Magic RabbitThis card though, has 3 modes from which you can choose:-Gaming mode-Entertainment mode-Audio Creation modewhen you switch between modes you are being advised to exit all audio applications, the OS hiccups a bit and some RELAYS on the card start switching .. after-which everything changes and also it switches to another application/program. It's like it accesses another part of the driver or something.Also the onboard DACs are CIRRUS LOGIC CS4398... which can also be found in the Lynx, E-MU 1820, Headroom MicroDAC, Musiland MD10, Zhaolu 2.5C and other good external DACs.So i'd say, this card is pretty good for both gamingANDmusic.. (something that is not fashionable anymore with modern sound cards)Just a thought..

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 06:30:52 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on October 30, 2015, 01:46:35 pmIt was a long time ago, but ti was a phono preamp being fed by a moving coil cartridge through a moving coil preamp. At this point I can't remember if it was in inverting mode or not. Yes, the TL072 and the LF356 are both much noisier than the NE5532 but perhaps they were masked by the vinyl noise or the ambient noise conditions.Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 01:34:50 pmSubjective? What does subjective have to do with reproducible results? If it can't be measured or statistically shown to exist by ABX, then it doesn't exist.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 06:55:43 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on October 30, 2015, 06:30:52 pmI don't wish to start a flame war here, however this kind of statement means that you just don't know the subject very well. Even the first part:Quoteis not quite correct. Sometimes we just don't know enough about the process to be able to measure what weshouldmeasure. And the usual card trick in this situation by the "objectivist" audio crowd is to resort to something thatcanbe measured, and pretend that it is all we ever need. A plain and shameless substitution.Now to the second part: the "ABX" testing is probably the biggest con in audio business. Forget insanely expensive wires, mysterious stickers, green pens and other kinds of snake oil, the ABX tops it all. As a properly controlled DBT is a) very difficult to organise properly and b) quite useless in practice due to a very low sensitivity, here comes the ABX.CheersAlex

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 06:57:32 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on October 30, 2015, 06:30:52 pmThe 5532 lends itself very well for amplifiers with low source impedances - like dynamic microphones - due to it's low voltage noise (and high current noise). The two FET amplifiers he mentions are both very old ones, with a lot voltage noise (but comparatively low current noise). One can make a nomogram which amplifier is best for which source impedance ; I made one a while ago in my lab book for a couple of op amps I stock. I'd roughly guess that the TL0xx are probably only better than a 5532 with source impedances exceeding a couple dozen k?. Of course today's FET op amps are much better than the TL0xx, and since the 5532 came out a couple of amps that improve on all specs of it were developed.The TL0xx also suffer from a high 1/f noise corner IIRC. (Which is kinda typical for the FET amps of their era)

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 06:58:45 pm
content: QuoteCan you name a parameter of electronic amplifiers that has an influence on the signal, but can't be measured?

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 07:03:54 pm
content: Quote from: dom0 on October 30, 2015, 06:58:45 pmwarm, cold, dry, bright, name it (sound)

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 07:20:57 pm
content: Quote from: dom0 on October 30, 2015, 06:58:45 pmIt is not as simple as this. The problem is not in measuring something , but mostly in interpreting the measurement results. We just don't know enough about human perception of the sound to find a proper correlation between measurements and subjective listening results. And we cannot dismiss subjective side completely (or, worse still, resort to the trickery of ABX), as with that we dismiss the whole point of music reproduction by electronic means. If we would only have to satisfy some measuring equipment and not the human hearing, a life of audio electronics designers would be so much easier, believe me. All amplifiers are imperfect in some way, however if you would try to analyse such imperfections and "map" these to the differences in the sound, you'll find that it is next to impossible to get some meaningful result. My background is in instrumentation and measuring equipment. When I've started to work in audio design professionally (about 22 years ago), I was absolutely sure that you can easily measure what is needed. I had to change that approach quite soon.CheersAlex

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 09:31:53 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 30, 2015, 07:03:54 pmTook the words right out of my mouth...This kind of behavior in sound is exactly what was said to change when replacing the stock OpAmps in the X-Fi series. With the LM4562 someone took some measurements and reported very slight improvements (deemed as inaudible) but there were certain aspects of it that couldn't be measured (or didn't know what to look for), but EVERYONE was able to hear with their ears.So all this leads back to my initial belief that: "if it doesn't kill the card, it doesn't hurt to try"

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 09:39:18 pm
content: Everyone heard the improvement they wanted to hear, and cannot actually quantify.All it hurts is your wallet. And perception of reality.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 09:47:18 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 06:55:43 pmYes, of course, you know everything about me and my experience from one post. You can make assertions all you want about me, but it doesn't mean anything.Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 06:55:43 pmStraw man arguments always win, no? I didn't say that we necessarily know how to measure it or even know how to interpret the results. I said "If it can't be measured". Read the words, not what you want to read into them. Card trick? Reality is a card trick and the personal feelings of an individual is to be taken as a reality? Really? You believe this? When did I say we know how to measure everything or know how the human ear and brain works sufficiently to assess anything that way? Stop putting words in my mouth.Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 06:55:43 pmSo, if it can't be measured by us yet, and we don't know enough of how our perception works, we can't even use the perceiver as the test instrument? So it cant be measured, and can't be repeated by anyone, and it still exists.......ABX is a proven scientific method used to weed out personal bias and perception flaws from knowing a change has been made. Please explain how the method is flawed, and not how hard it is to do it in practice. There might actually be many cases where a true ABX test cannot be done. It is always the claim of the subjectivists that ABX testing interferes with their concentration or something woowoo and therefore the ABX test is invalid. It is basically the claim that whatever you do, you can't test it and even if you can it is invalid because the test interferes with the result.These questions are at the root of what the OP is going to do with his sound card and money and time. If it can't be measured, or proven to exist using the person making the claim of the existence of the effect as the test instrument under controlled conditions, then it is a waste of time and money unless the objective is to play around and waste money.If someone likes the sound of 10% second harmonic distortion, great! When someone spends $5K on 300B single ended tube amps and say they are accurate, well what can anyone say except that person likes the sound? If someone has fun modding internal sound cards with little bits that don't necessarily make a difference, good for them too. If they ask for engineering facts about making the changes, then they get engineering answers. Some people have tried to express that changing an op amp all by itself without any consideration for the whole circuit can lead to worse sound. Maybe those who have done the changes have heard a change in sound (perhaps for the worse) and have concluded that it is better just because that was their intention, to make things better. This happens all the time. Perhaps there is added distortion and perhaps it is second order. Many people enjoy second order distortion as has already been said, so perhaps that is what they get and not more accurate sound.How do we know without measurements or double blind testing if the fallible human is actually hearing some improvement or not?

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 09:56:50 pm
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amYou know, instead of dicking around and trying to modify a consumer-level product like the Creative thing, spend a few dollars and get a professional DAC from Apogee or Focusrite or Avid or whomever. The thing will work properly right out of the box and will sound fine.Here's a question for you: what kind of speakers are you using? As everyone should know, the speakers are the weakest link in the playback chain, and spending money here gives you more bang for your buck than you'll ever get with op-amp swaps.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:01:08 pm
content: What Bassman59 said.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:01:48 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on October 30, 2015, 09:47:18 pmHow do we know without measurements or double blind testing if the music is beautiful or not? Or even if it is music or not? Surely it is impossible.CheersAlex

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:06:11 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 10:01:48 pmHuh?Red herring time now? Equivocation fallacies? WTF are you going on a tangent about?

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:09:48 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on October 30, 2015, 10:06:11 pmOh. Please answer just one question: what is the point of recording and then reproducing music?CheersAlex

author: dadler
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:22:18 pm
content: Uh oh, time to discusshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia...

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:32:18 pm
content: Quote from: dadler on October 30, 2015, 10:22:18 pmI would not venture that far. I am an engineer, not a philosopher. I am only concerned here with a task of making good sounding electronics. If it is impossible to make a connection between a subjective experience and an objective existence of, say, an amplifier design which can be reliably repeated in production, than it would be impossible to design a good sounding amplifier at all.CheersAlex

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:34:01 pm
content: I gave up on the audio 'golden-ear' crowd a long time ago. Face the facts golden ears are mostly language majors and will always come up with new unique words to describe things they hear that can't be measured. They just are not encumbered with how the physics actually works, so they will always have more material to draw from for their claims.Face it there can never be closure on this topic. The golden ears listen to music and tell you their impression of the sound and the engineers measure things using sine waves (and sometimes square waves) and report the data from the measurement. Neither side of this subjective Vs objective divide will ever to able to convince the other, as facts are not the issue just opinions. It's hopeless.If one feels a set of $1,000+ interconnect cables improves their system sound then so be it, it's their money, system, and opinions. But around here I would always expect a lot of push back on 'audio quality' claims that are not backed up with repeatable evidence. Human senses and mental processes are fallible, that is a fact. That some profit from this is to be expected, but when liquid nitrogen treated cables can be sold at uber inflated prices with even higher inflated claims of sound improvement I can only shake my head in wonderment.

author: dadler
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:40:01 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 10:32:18 pmI don't disagree. I only argue that subjective experience is real, even if fallible and inconsistent.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:41:36 pm
content: Quote from: retrolefty on October 30, 2015, 10:34:01 pmI agree completely. A problem is that aQuotein this area is not really possible. Which creates a suitable environment for snake oil sellers.CheersAlex

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 10:54:44 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 10:09:48 pmThat is one question, but a pretty open one. The majority will probably say to enjoy the music at another time. People enjoy music on AM radio, 32kbps MP3 files, steaming on youtube, on two million dollar systems playing virgin vinyl discs, etc.... Enjoyment of music does not necessarily have anything to do with better sound reproduction accuracy. Again, straw men arguments. I never said that people cannot enjoy music with inaccurate reproduction, nor have I said they can't get satisfaction from tinkering and thinking that they have improved the accuracy of the reproduction. This has nothing to do with the engineering questions posed by the OP. He got his answers and didn't like them.If people like their fantasies about sound and they feel good about it, I am happy for them. If they want to have the best accuracy of reproduction then feelings go out the door because people feel differently about everything all the time. You can't engineer how a person feels about what they hear. That is up to them, whether it truly is an accurate reproduction or not.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 11:43:38 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on October 30, 2015, 10:54:44 pmEssentially, you are saying that it is not possible to design sound reproduction equipment that addresses that enjoyment from music. Yes, tastes are different, however, from my personal experience the enjoyment of music and the "technical accuracy" in signal reproduction (as much as we can measure it) are neither directly connected nor mutually exclusive. In my designs I always did try to get as close to the technical accuracy as possible (though usually on a very tight budget) however I've found that if you rely entirely on the measured performance it is easy to create an apparently technically competent device which would give you very little enjoyment even from your favourite music - less than a pocket AM radio can (and so that device misses the most important design requirement IMHO) . What is the point then? And again, my experience shows that it is possible to address that design requirement if you learn to trust your subjective experience and use it as a tool. Again, if you are only fooling yourself, than it would be impossible or at least quite improbable to design a good sounding device into production. I did manage to do that more than once. That for me is a good proof that I am not just hallucinating.CheersAlex

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2015, 11:48:53 pm
content: QuoteIf you really believe that then you should not consider yourself an engineer but rather an audio priest that works in a different domain.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2015, 12:00:10 am
content: Quote from: retrolefty on October 30, 2015, 11:48:53 pmWhy? Only because I don't follow the pseudo-scientific bias of the "objectivists" in audio? I design pretty decent electronics in areas that have nothing to do with sound.CheersAlex

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2015, 12:00:18 am
content: @Lightages"Some people have tried to express that changing an op amp all by itself without any consideration for the whole circuit can lead to worse sound. [...]Perhaps there is added distortion and perhaps it is second order. Many people enjoy second order distortion as has already been said, so perhaps that is what they get and not more accurate sound."This had actually crossed my mind a few times..also.."the OP. He got his answers and didn't like them."Really? Coz I have a hard time consider 3 & 1/2 pages of criticizing my question and "snake oil" banners, asanswers.Half of my posts are still without answer! Now, new ppl coming in giving their 2 cents without even reading the whole damn thread...@Bassman59 & @LightagesRead posts #18 and #44...you should actually at least browse through the thread before replyingand in regards to speakers being the best investment.. um... No. The best investment is in the actual weakest link of thewholesetup. Which in my case is the sound card which (among other things) has worst bass than my previous Audigy2.@blueskullwell, that was one of the points of this entire thread.. the opamps that i want to replace are final stage i think. That's why i posted the data sheets; to get some opinions if the replacements maybe suitable for that stage of the circuit. I even gave a link to a picture of the card where it can clearly be seen the opamps almost next to the output jacks.

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2015, 12:00:29 am
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 10:01:48 pm

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2015, 12:00:36 am
content: Quote from: retrolefty on October 30, 2015, 11:48:53 pmNo, he's right. Bass is the perfect example.Rather have a good all-round sounding bass, than perfectly reproduced bass that hurts my head or is too muted.The human ear likes what the human ear likes.

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2015, 12:31:12 am
content: The "funny" thing is, i never said i was in the quest for the most perfect studio-grade sound. Or that i believe that +5HP stickers actually give you 5 extra horsepower.I just wanted to replace some stuff & needed some electronical guidance, so as not to fry my card.(Not to mention that newer sound cards nowadays have their OpAmps mounted in DIP-8 sockets so that you can swap them with anything you want)If you replace a shoe with 10 holes, with a shoe with 9 holes, that's still an upgrade. I just gave all the detail that i could in the first post, because the forum rules said i should. I now realize that was a mistake. Almost everyone is besides the intended subject.This whole fuckin thread reminds me of feminism.10 times worse than any bad sound.--Thank you to the very few people that provided the few answers i got; take care.

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2015, 02:00:17 am
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 31, 2015, 12:00:36 amFTFY.You got very clear answers from what I read. Replacing components on your sound card is not going to make a noticeable difference. Period.If you say there is a night&day difference, prove it. Show the measurement results to support your claims. Just becauseyoucan hear it, doesn't mean it's there.By all means, replace your components with more expensive ones if you are going to "hear" better sound quality, however don't bring that bullshit to an electronics forum and expect actual electronics engineers to accept it.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 31, 2015, 03:40:16 am
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 11:43:38 pmYou really like the straw man argument, don't you....When did I say that you cannot design a system to please a person's taste? I think I said it outright. Some people like second order distortion. In fact I would bet that many people would find it pleasing in the right amounts. Build it in and people will like it. People also tend to like more bass than real and some hate clear highs. That is the market for Bose. Bose (the consumer arm) is an engineering company that builds equipment to what people want to buy, not necessarily what is more accurate.I said "You can't engineer how a person feels about what they hear. " not "You can't engineer things to people's tastes". Is it accurate? Who cares, if the person likes it and that is the goal? If the goal is to improve the accuracy of the reproduction then it has to accurate, not how a person feels that day with a head cold, or just listened to machines all day at work, or they want to rave all night.Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amQuote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 09:12:51 amand you got the caveats:Quote from: Kleinstein on October 29, 2015, 04:26:41 pmQuote from: Lightages on October 29, 2015, 06:55:46 pmQuote from: Lightages on October 29, 2015, 06:55:46 pmQuote from: dom0 on October 29, 2015, 07:56:21 pmQuote from: Lightages on October 29, 2015, 11:43:43 pmQuote from: wraper on October 30, 2015, 01:14:56 pmQuote from: Hero999 on October 30, 2015, 01:46:35 pmand I took the time to read and respond, now being accused of not reading. Why bother do we bother if we just get accused of not reading when we are only trying to help?Quote from: Foxer on October 31, 2015, 12:00:18 am

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 11:31:54 am
content: Quote from: Foxer on October 31, 2015, 12:00:18 amIf you're certain the sound card is the weakest link then it must be a really shit sound card and replacing the op-amps will not do any good, as they're certainly not the weakest link in the sound card.Even the best speakers introduce more distortion than average op-amps such as the NE5532 so getting better speakers is a more sensible idea than replacing the op-amps inside the sound card.So far you haven't properly explained what issues you're having with the sound card. All you've done is asked about two potential solutions: replacing the op-amps and the clock. Both of which we've told you will not have a positive outcome.Is it noise?If you're having problems with noise when content is being played from the Internet or on your PC then it'll be filtering on the power supply or the source which is the problem. If the noise is only a problem with an external microphone then get a decent low preamplifier and microphone.If it's distortion then that will be the speakers or power amplifier.If you like second order distortion then perhaps you could investigate the idea of adding that in software.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 11:33:02 am
content: Quote from: Hero999 on November 01, 2015, 11:31:54 amItisan X-Fi...

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 11:35:43 am
content: I think i need to invent a really expensive super cool linear power supply, he'll take like a fish to water with thatI found one simply way of improving my sound years ago when onboard audio was crap and picked up all of the noise from the motherboard - I just used a crappy old soundblaster card that meants the analogue was removed from the motherboards and away from noise, I bet you's not be able to tell the difference from your hi tech cards of today.Anyone wanting to poor money down the drain will soon find a que of people lining up to take that money in return for dubious products.

author: tron9000
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 11:41:19 am
content: And I repeat: you said you didn't know much about op amps, yet here you are preaching to us that changing them would improve sound quality! It's the equivalent of holding up an orange and saying if I paint it green it's an apple!You foxer, buddy, have wandered into an EE forum ill informed and blinded by your own righteous ideas to bother to listen us, who are trying to help and guide on the correct path, if you throw that back with your own brand of pseudo-babble science, then you are going to get no help, mocked and eventually booted.If you think you are right, as stated before, show us some actual hard data, not theory. Maybe if you did the experiments you'd find how hard it is to measure audio quality in the small amounts you are stating.Heed the warning.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 12:40:08 pm
content: Quote from: tron9000 on November 01, 2015, 11:41:19 amI think it is a bit unfair to the TS. There is a difference between, say, building or repairing a car and driving it. If I don't know that much about tyres but know how to replace these and would like to try a different kind to improve my driving experience, I may go to a specialist forum and ask questions if a particular tyre would be suitable and safe, is there something I should take a special care when replacing it etc. And these are perfectly validuserquestions. If instead of providing a straight and sensible answer the experts on the forum would have a go at me saying that this kind of replacement can not change the way my car performs and any possible improvements in my driving experience are due to my imagination, would that be helpful? of fair?CheersAlex

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 03:46:55 pm
content: Alex, a car tyre has a standard interface to connect to, it's called a standard size wheel that many tires are made to fit. In the case of the opamp it is different. The interface is the passive circuitry put around that particular op amp and matched to that particular opamp taking it's carachteristics into account. Putting another opamp in is not at all like changing a tire on a car.The clock jitter is absolute rubbish. The clock is stable enough in frequency and any jitter is filtered out by the fact that you have MHz of cristal that will clock a device generating KHz of signal, there are so many clock cycles in every output sample that any jitter will simply filter out to the average clock frequency never mind the fact that it is a load of bollocks anyway.

author: Alex Nikitin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 04:19:37 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on November 01, 2015, 03:46:55 pmEven more reasons for the TS to come and ask questions.Quote from: Simon on November 01, 2015, 03:46:55 pmTell that to any hi-res ADC or DAC user. Not in audio field, mind you.CheersAlex

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 04:33:52 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on November 01, 2015, 12:40:08 pmThe OP got both responses, straight, and extra advice. Some of the responses were to give him advice on the folly of thinking that the naive changes would improve things, some were to answer his concerns over compatibility, and some to ridicule the motivating ideas behind the want to change things. The other alternative is to have everyone ignore him. I don't think giving someone advice is a wrong thing. The OP can take the advice or leave it. I certainly did not insult the OP but rather tried to help. So did many people. He got the answers as best could be determined from the information at hand.

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 04:49:05 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on November 01, 2015, 11:35:43 amFYI there is a German company selling ultra-low noise low drift low tempco ultra-low output impedance linear supplies for audio (about 200 € each). They essentially build a 78XX with no thermal protection out of some LM4040, LM358 and a couple transistors and put a 500 mA current sink on the output. Print transformers are 08/15 units from Block ; don't even have electro-static shielding

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 04:52:25 pm
content: Well mine will be shittier but more expensive. You see it's about what the unit looks like and what it costs, if it's expensive it much be good and has more bragging rights.

author: dom0
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 08:22:25 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on November 01, 2015, 04:52:25 pmI suggest using tons of cheap NOS transistors in some old metal case. Maybe even polish them chemically.Look how shiny zis is, musst be gud ware!

author: tron9000
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 09:49:28 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on November 01, 2015, 12:40:08 pmOK here's a better analogy -you want to get more power out of the engine and you decide to turbo charge it, you don't just bolt a turbo onto a car without taking into the considerations of how much hotter your engines going to get, if you even have enough space to fit it, are you going to have too much manifold pressure, what happens to the pressure when you close the throttle off suddenly and so on.You don't just say I've bolted on a turbo therefore it has more power cos without taking into account what the manufacturer has done, you could have compromised the mechanical integrity of the engine or made less power due to not taking into account certain things.true you can ask questions in relevant places,like:"what turbo would be suitable for...?", but you don't turn round to those people and say:"oh I bolted a 109mm turbo without intercooling, blow-off valve and didn't tune it and I made 1000HP even though I have no access to a dyno!, cos you can't say that when all you done is overtake some biddy doing 40mph in a 60mph zone.I know he's trying to improve himself by asking said questions, but I find it highly insulting to tellUSthe very peoplehe's asked help fromthat we are wrong in some ways and that engineers that have been designing products for 30-odd yearsQuoteI find that insulting!going back to your tyre analogy: you don't walk into the garage, ask the mechanic what tryes he'd recommend for your budget and conditions and then say to him "no I don't accept that! you suck at fitting tyres!" cos you'd get told to go somewhere else.sorry, not aimed to you Alex, but that sort of attitude grinds my gears!

author: Messtechniker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2015, 11:40:43 pm
content: Quote from: tron9000 on November 01, 2015, 09:49:28 pmAs I already hinted above in this thread, we are deep in to psychology here.Judging by the quote above and the discussion here, it seems that we are hereseeing a fine example of the "Dunning-Kruger Effect".For details on this psychological effect, see:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effectI've seen this effect quite a few times over the past years and the experts here probably too.My own brief description of this effect is: Overestimation of own capabilities andunderestimation of expert's capabilities. And not only in the audio field.Anyway, let's stay scientific.Yours - Messtechniker

author: tron9000
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2015, 09:21:39 am
content: Not into psychology but that is an interesting study, had to chuckle about thE guy robbing a bank with lemon juice on his face!

author: ConKbot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2015, 01:00:08 pm
content: Is this still a giant clusterfuck?

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2016, 09:19:39 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Nikitin on October 30, 2015, 01:34:50 pmEdit: (pushed the wrong button the wrong time)Thanks so much Alex for getting this thread back to the level of open minded attitude that I used to like in particular within this forum.I accidentally stumbled over this thread and was disappointed about the level of arrogance I found in some responses to a question that was posted under (sic) "beginners".The attitude of "you can't trust what you can't measure' sometimes just reflects the inability or non-willingness to measure it.I remember long long time ago a problem that I was facing when I was designing "high resolution video ADC's (ice age, before I mutated to R&D management): The reason for underperforming ADC (also) was a clock issue:That time it took four 6 Bit ADC's to make a 8 bit ADC.Reason for underperformance was a clock signal that (on PCB) went the opposit direction to the signal to be digitizedI.e just 2inch of wrong PCB trace did cost me performance of a complete Bit (6dB)I did cost a lot of very expensive measurement gear (40 MHz pure sinus -70dB spurious free range) and engineering work(doing weighted FFT and computing SNR) to track down.What I've learned from this: Be humble and open minded if you dont understand something as I did that timeCheersPeter

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 25, 2016, 09:49:26 pm
content: Quote from: DuPe on January 25, 2016, 09:19:39 pmJust to be clear, I saidQuoteIf it a difference can't be demonstrated, how does it exist?

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2016, 10:21:55 pm
content: I am completely with you, but i dont see a contradiction to my post.

author: MagicSmoker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2016, 10:59:36 pm
content: N.B - I did not read the whole thread; I saw enough of the usual "this is all audiphoolery" and that the OP doesn't feel his questions have been answered.Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amGenerally speaking, jitter - or cycle by cycle phase skew - of the clock is more important than absolute frequency accuracy, especially for delta-sigma (aka "1 bit") DACs. Fortunately, most crystal oscillators have exceptionally low jitter; unfortunately, most DACs get their master clock via a fractional-N PLL, which tends to dramatically increase the jitter. Thus changing the crystal oscillator is unlikely to have any effect whatsoever on sound fidelity.See Maxim App Note 5477 for more on clock jitter.Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amCrackling noises are usually from vibration causing "piezoelectricity" in high-K ceramic dielectric capacitors, particularly in local IC bypass and coupling applications.Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amIt has been my experience - and I am speaking as a bit of an audiophile (who at age 43 can still hear up to 16.5kHz) - that replacing really crappy op-amps like, say, an LM358, will improve sound quality (lower distortion, better power supply rejection ratio, less phase shift w/ frequency due to higher gain-bandwidth product, etc.) but once you are at the level of an NE5532 or an LM833 there isn't much benefit to be had (exception - if driving headphones directly then an op-amp with higher than usual output current capability helps - I like STMicro's TSH22).The OPA1604 is better on paper in most respects than either of the two NJM op-amps, but I honestly doubt you'll notice the difference. One aspect of the OPA1604 that isn't usually good for audio applications is its rail-to-rail output - this output configuration tends to have higher distortion as the signal level approaches either rail (of course, if the signal is at or exceeds the rail it will be clipped, and that results in huge amounts of odd order harmonics that sound downright harsh).Bottom line: I'd leave the NJM op-amps in.Quote from: Foxer on October 29, 2015, 06:38:25 amThe OPA1604 is a fine op-amp and will certainly not be the limiting factor in how well a soundcard sounds (even though it is a rail-to-rail type) but as I already said I don't think you'll actually notice an improvement. Sadly, the things that most affect sound quality in a soundcard are difficult or impossible to change such as board layout, power supply noise/ripple and the filtering/decoupling thereof, and EMI/RFI from all that digital crap, both on the soundcard itself and inside the computer.As for capacitors, it always helps to make sure all aluminum electrolytic types are good quality Panasonic, United Chemicon or Nichicon brands intended for switching regulators (look for "high ripple current" and "low impedance" attributes), and replacing any high-K ceramic surface mount capacitors with X7R types rated for at least 2x the voltage they will experience, where possible, will reduce "piezoelectric microphonics" as well as phase shift errors from capacitance change due to temperature and bias/signal voltage (only a problem with coupling capacitors, not those used for bypass/decoupling).

author: Foxer
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2016, 08:35:34 pm
content: Quote from: MagicSmoker on January 25, 2016, 10:59:36 pmThank you MagicSmoker for the good info!