开云体育

I love that opamp. With that being said I now use the OPA1642 as it has a couple more useful specs for me.?

开云体育

OPA2134 (and his single version OPA134) is an excellent all-round performer. It's a FET opamp, so it's recommended for high impedance circuits. It's about 6dB noisier than LM5532 on low impedance sources.
It replaces advantageously the old warhorses TL07X

What exactly is he raving about? Noise? Then OPA1641/42 are better choice as others already mentioned. Same for quiescent current, especially for phantom powered mics. Or is it for THD + N? There, the 1641/42 outperform the 2134 as well, though I dare say that nobody is ever going to notice the difference between 0.00008% and 0.00005% THD + N. Or does he rave about subjective sonic qualities? I'll leave those claims for what they are and I'm not going to make any comparisons with other devices in that regard.

Other op-amps worth mentioning are the OPA1655 (single) and OPA1656 (Dual). Noise at 1kHz and up is even lower compared to the 1641 and the 1655 is avalaible in an convenient SOT23-5 package. But it has a high 1/f noise corner, so I'm not sure if A-weighted noise is lower than the 1641. And quiescent current limits the use of only one device in a phantom powered mic.

If your circuit allows the use of BJT input op-amps and there are no? quiescent current limitations, the choice becomes even bigger. E.g. OPA1611 and 1612 are superior op-amps. Just google for TI SoundPlus for even more options.

Jan

On a somewhat related note, i bought a few OPA1642? and they were $3 each. I had thought it would be cheaper. Does anybody know how much it should cost TI to manufacture these guys? is the price mostly profit margin or is the component expensive to produce ?

开云体育

The cost of silicon is negligible. You pay for the R&D and overheads of a big company.