[sdiy] LF444 vs. NTE859?

[Roy J. Tellason]

On Wednesday 13 February 2008 15:00, anthony wrote:
> In that application it should work OK, but try cross-reffing ANY quad BiFET
> amp: TL0X4 for example (at least TL074, TL084 & TL064 if not the whole TL0
> series), many LF series or just about any other even with significantly
> varying spec's and it'll show you the NTE859. This is true for the singles
> and doubles (whatever NTE numbers corresponding to them, which I can't
> recall offhand...)
>
> It's hard to say if the NTE859 is an improvement over lesser opamps and a
> comromise for better opamps.

Not for me it's not -- it's a compromise.

> I dunno, I haven't used enough of the NTE parts to compare them.

I try to avoid them if possible.

> I do know that many of them are simply relable jobs, easilly observable by
> scraping or simply looking past the whited-on NTE number. I don't think
> every single part is a relabel job, but I do know that every single one from
> the RCA CAXXXX series that I bought (CA3080E,  CA3080H, CA3140 and some
> others I forget...was a relabel, except maybe for the can ones (CA902?).
> When their lifetime buy supply ran out a year or so ago (for the CA3080),
> there were osoleted. You can still get them elsewhere - and probably for a
> lot cheaper... 

No doubt.

> But the issue at hand is opamps. I think people should approach the use of
> the NTE859 in critical circuits with caution, and to definitely report
> rsults here for the rest of us. An A/B comparison with a number of the
> actual opamps that the NTE859 is supposed to cross with would be a good
> project. Battery life in Ray Wilson's Soundlab would be a great test. Since
> long battery life is one of the plusses that may sway one to favor the
> LF444 over other similar amps.
>
> The only other thing I can think of is I'm sure you can get an actual LF444
> for a lot less than an NTE859.

Oh yeah.

Going back a whole *bunch* of years there have been a number of attempts at 
a "universal" product line of one sort or another.  GE had one,  where the 
prefix was simply GE.  RCA had the SK series of parts.  Sylvania,  later on 
Philips,  had ECG -- that one was my preferred supplier for this sort of 
thing,  when I needed it.

The point is,  with the exception of Motorola's HEP (Hobby Electronics Parts) 
line,  the rest of these were *ALL* designed to supply consumer electronics 
repair people with easily obtainable parts when the manufacturer's parts 
weren't readily available.  As a result,  all of the specs on them are a 
compromise,  in some way or another.  And all are going to be more expensive 
than the original part,  if you can get the original number still.  In the 
repair context this didn't matter much because those situations usually 
involved a markup and it was all passed along to the customer anyhow,  but it 
makes no sense to go there when DIY'ing synth or other stuff.

ECG was my preferred source for this stuff back when I was doing a lot of 
equipment repair,  you could pick up the phone and actually get somebody on 
the other end who would be able to help you out when a cross-reference didn't 
work out.  As for example the Yamaha piano (model number escapes me at the 
moment) that had all FETs in it,  original part number 2SK30AY.  The unit I 
had in for repair was equipped with some ECG132 parts that somebody had put 
in there,  a discontinued 25V part.  With a 35V power supply it's no wonder 
the guy had further problems!  They suggested ECG459 instead,  which is a 50V 
part,  but that didn't work out in the long run.  As it turned out,  a Yamaha 
tech told me that the factory _selects_ their parts for 90V breakdown,  and 
it wasn't until I got some of those that the problems stopped recurring.

NTE,  initially,  _copied_ the ECG numbering system,  rather than coming up 
with one of their own.  In fact,  I recall some mention of there being a 
lawsuit because of them copying the cross-reference guide,  too,  though I 
don't have any substantial information on that.  Anyhow,  I've never liked 
them,  they've always struck me as a "me too!" company that ran into the 
market with their sometimes-off parts to try and make a buck at the 
replacement parts racket without having to actually do all the work involved 
first.  So I avoid them whenever possible these days.

For whatever that's worth.

-- 
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space,  a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed.  --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James 
M Dakin