A TL072 is two TL071 in one package. To turn a TL072 into a TL071 make an adapter that connects one of the opamps in the TL072 to pins 2, 3, and 6 and the power supply to pins 4 and 7. I would configure the remaining opamp in the TL072 as a buffer and ground its input just so it doesn't chatter or does anything irrational.
Tom
Tom
Hallo lieber Freund!
No! Your rewiring will absolutely Not work! Get yourself TL071s and be a happy Camper!
We also don‘t know if the offset Pins are used in the application circuit.
Grüsse,
Winfried
No! Your rewiring will absolutely Not work! Get yourself TL071s and be a happy Camper!
We also don‘t know if the offset Pins are used in the application circuit.
Grüsse,
Winfried
TLO71 to TL074 all use same op amp.
Same for TLO81 series.
You can use TLO81 or TLO61 if you want.
Same for TLO81 series.
You can use TLO81 or TLO61 if you want.
061 / 071 / 081 = Single
062 / 072 / 082 = Double
064 / 074 / 084 = Quadruple
in one package.... but each op amp inside is identical.
The power supply is one set of pins per IC... shared between multiple dies inside, if it is a multiple version.
Capacitor will be better, less chance of damage to chip.
Like Tom says.
One capacitor for input coupling on a 4440 IC had a dry joint, signal went open, and the IC went into over gain, and died.
So, use a buffer (capacitor).
062 / 072 / 082 = Double
064 / 074 / 084 = Quadruple
in one package.... but each op amp inside is identical.
The power supply is one set of pins per IC... shared between multiple dies inside, if it is a multiple version.
Capacitor will be better, less chance of damage to chip.
Like Tom says.
One capacitor for input coupling on a 4440 IC had a dry joint, signal went open, and the IC went into over gain, and died.
So, use a buffer (capacitor).
Last edited:
That's exactly what I suggested in Post #2.
There are differences between TL06x, TL07x, and TL08x. The TL06x is 1 MHz versus 3 MHz for the TL07x and TL08x. Also beware that there are new and improved versions of these. TI offers a TL071H, for example which has 5 MHz bandwidth. In most circuits the difference is negligible but there could be applications out there where the difference could mean crappy transient response or instability if you use the faster part.
Tom
TL071H is a CMOS op-amp with much higher 1/f noise than the normal JFET-input TL071, so it depends on your application whether it's an improvement or a degradation. Otherwise I agree with tomchr.
I like Tl07x & LF35x series very much. They're cheap, not prone to oscillations & provides acceptable performance for line level audio. Opa213x series is a updated equivalent but little bit expensive. Why buy opamps like LME49720/ LM4562 (a 55Mhz part) which isn't necessarily required for audio & if you don't know how to use it properly(NE553x series good enough if noise is your concern).
Some of the early opamps are still relevant today. With its low input bias current, the LF357 is a good candidate for a DC servo, for example. Granted the few mV offset isn't stellar by modern standards, but good enough for a power amp for sure.
The NE5532 is pretty hard to beat in a moving magnet phono stage for similar reasons. There are some modern opamps that are better, but they're also 5-60x the price.
Tom
The NE5532 is pretty hard to beat in a moving magnet phono stage for similar reasons. There are some modern opamps that are better, but they're also 5-60x the price.
Tom
That's a gem & very affordable although i yet to use one. I already mentioned it as 553x. Although 22pf is a typical compensation value for 5534 but i stayed away from it because the minimum gain is 5x. OPA2134 & 5532 is good enough for my use.
The last JFET dinosaur i want to try is lf356.
The last JFET dinosaur i want to try is lf356.
Last edited:
I've always considered the NE5534 to be half of an NE5532, decompensated. I don't know how accurate that is, but it's probably not too far off the mark.
Tom
Tom
Isn't it true that current noise of 5534 is lower than 5532? Maybe i'm wrong, have to see their datasheet.
It is at 30 Hz and at 1 kHz. It's a bit peculiar because the lower input bias current of the NE5532 should result in less base shot noise, and therefore less white current noise. I guess it has far more 1/f current noise than the NE5534.
It probably was at its time. There are better options these days. The OPA164x springs to mind. But the NE5534 is every bit as good today as it was when it was released.
Any differences in noise between the NE5534 and NE5532 could be due to the decompensation. The lower input bias current of the NE5532 could mean that the input pair runs at a lower tail current. Maybe they made the input devices smaller to save space in the dual. But there are certainly many similarities between the two devices. I haven't traced the schematics line-by-line but they sure look very, very similar with only a few tweaks here and there.
Tom
I'm not sure I follow. I wonder if you're mixing two noise sources together. 1/f noise (popcorn/flicker noise) and shot noise are caused by two different mechanisms. Shot noise is from the random flow of electrons. 1/f noise is generally from charges getting stuck in impurities in the semiconductor materials and getting released from these traps at random (but generally long) time intervals. It's not clear to me why a device with a higher bias current should also have higher 1/f noise. I haven't looked at the equations in a while, so I could easily be forgetting something.
Any differences in noise between the NE5534 and NE5532 could be due to the decompensation. The lower input bias current of the NE5532 could mean that the input pair runs at a lower tail current. Maybe they made the input devices smaller to save space in the dual. But there are certainly many similarities between the two devices. I haven't traced the schematics line-by-line but they sure look very, very similar with only a few tweaks here and there.
Tom