Yahoo Groups archive

Doepfer

Index last updated: 2026-04-29 00:15 UTC

Thread

Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-06-26 by therpocc

Hi, everyone.
I just found extremely simple way to dramatically improve signal/noise ratio of a modular system. Here i assume using of A-138 inevitable as it's common utility component for creating complex, fat patches and also is common module to pass sound to next system.

We all use mixers all time — to mix several oscillators, mix CV (with linear mixers), to mix gate signals and get simple sequencer. Mixer also as do VCAs or filters, contains amplifier. In case of mixers we are dealing with operational amplifier working at little gain or even unity gain.

Unfortunately, complex components such as OpAmps are noisy things. Moreover, mixers often may work with wide dynamic range. All of this leads to problems with noisy output of the whole system. Did you experienced a situation where you've made some very pleasant sound utilizing your lovely custom VCOs, softened it with Lo-Pass filter, set up some modulations, but it all can be easily ruined by VCA-Mixer chain? You try to increase volume, but either mixer's input is overloading or thermal noise becomes clearly audible. That's why we need modules to be the same quality level and that's why some critical components must be precise and expensive.

I've done investigations about OpAmps noise characteristics and done some experiments with my modular. The following is what i've found.

The OpAmps used in Doepfer modules most of time is:
LM324, TL062, TL064, TL084.

Look at the characteristics taken from ST and AD datasheets:

TL062/064 (Low-power version)
Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        42 nv/sqr(Hz)
Channel Separation:                    120 dB

LM324 (Old design
Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        40 nv/sqr(Hz)
Channel Separation:                    120 dB

TL072/074/082/084 (Low-noise
Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        15 nv/sqr(Hz)
Channel Separation:                    120 dB

We can see that LM324 is actually not the best existing amplifier for audio purpose however there's much worse models usually used only in power aplications.

Now let's take a look on one AD's modern component. OP470 is expensive operational amplifier dedicated especially for audio. It has the almost best electrical characteristics and it has supply and input conditions that perfectly fit for modular synthesizer purposes: ±18v supply, rail-to-rail input, large gain, hi-liniarity, etc. So, it fits as direct replacement for OpAmps used in certain models.
It even encloses only in ceramic package.

AD OP470
Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        5 nv/sqr(Hz)
Channel Separation:                    125—155 dB

The A-138 mixer has extremely simple schematics: four passive attenuators built around quad OpAmp and one more attenuator for master level. That's all. But it can be simply overloaded and is really noisy component.

I've got trial amount of 6pcs OP470AY from China at price of 5$ each and replaced standard OpAmp on the A-138 with it and guess what? The amplification chain noise just almost disappear and even dynamic range has increased (distortions are gone away)! So, i got possibility to increase both input and output level. I did not measure s/n ratio gain before and after replacement because it was clearly audible, as i said before. I beleive, it's about 40-60 dB. My test setup was like A110Sine->A-106-6LP2 (Closed, no reso.)->A130->A138

A-138 costs about 50 Euro, so you need to add just $5—15 to get high-quality OpAmp and you'll get a much better mixer.

I also got similar improvements replacing OpAmp on the A-116, but has no significant result on Dark Energy, A-130, A-119 and none on any of my filters. (alas, these module type is really noisy!) But i believe OP470 must fit to simple mixer-like modules used for audio such as panners, x-faders, matrix mixer, maybe to some pre-amps or VCAs. Also many modules such as oscillators have output buffers or input pre-amps at there's non-zero chance to make it better. I'll return to my investigations later when i receive Hi-end VCO and VC Panner modules.

It would be highly appreciated if somebody who will try to improve his own mixer following this post, he will take the opportunity to test other modules, even non-Doepfer. The replacement is simple done with screwdriver (or chip-removing tool) because every IC on Doepfer modules is placed thru DIP-panel.

You can also try to install other OpAmps, like TL-082 (but changes would not be dramatical) or maybe another AD, THAT, etc production.

Also if any of the Doepfer representatives will read it, maybe you also so some research about this matter? It may be interesting to add additional items to catalog and it takes nothing. Also, maybe you will produce some "low-noise hi-end multimode filter" using this simple idea?

Best regards,
Dmitry Shtatnov

Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-06-26 by therpocc

I just have examined if all what I reported about modules is correct.

So, it's actually was some effect with the A-116, but it was just another way of folding without any noise reduction. So' it's seems ok to keep any standard OpAmp there.

In the opposite way, I found one OP470 inside the A-106-6 (Oberheim Filter) and remembered that replacing the input OpAmp (right next to CEM3379) improved the dynamic range of the filter that make possible to increase input signal level that finally convertible into s/n ratio because of constant filter noise.

AW: [Doepfer_a100] Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-06-27 by yahoo@doepfer.de

Dmitry,

thank you for the detailed report. That was interesting for me too.
Unfortunately the OP470 is very expensive (~ Euro 15 here in Germany) and
would increase the price of the modules clearly.

Best wishes
Dieter Doepfer
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com]Im Auftrag von therpocc
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 13:19
> An: Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com
> Betreff: [Doepfer_a100] Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.
>
>
> Hi, everyone.
> I just found extremely simple way to dramatically improve
> signal/noise ratio of a modular system. Here i assume using of
> A-138 inevitable as it's common utility component for creating
> complex, fat patches and also is common module to pass sound to
> next system.
>
> We all use mixers all time — to mix several oscillators, mix CV
> (with linear mixers), to mix gate signals and get simple
> sequencer. Mixer also as do VCAs or filters, contains amplifier.
> In case of mixers we are dealing with operational amplifier
> working at little gain or even unity gain.
>
> Unfortunately, complex components such as OpAmps are noisy
> things. Moreover, mixers often may work with wide dynamic range.
> All of this leads to problems with noisy output of the whole
> system. Did you experienced a situation where you've made some
> very pleasant sound utilizing your lovely custom VCOs, softened
> it with Lo-Pass filter, set up some modulations, but it all can
> be easily ruined by VCA-Mixer chain? You try to increase volume,
> but either mixer's input is overloading or thermal noise becomes
> clearly audible. That's why we need modules to be the same
> quality level and that's why some critical components must be
> precise and expensive.
>
> I've done investigations about OpAmps noise characteristics and
> done some experiments with my modular. The following is what i've found.
>
> The OpAmps used in Doepfer modules most of time is:
> LM324, TL062, TL064, TL084.
>
> Look at the characteristics taken from ST and AD datasheets:
>
> TL062/064 (Low-power version)
> Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        42 nv/sqr(Hz)
> Channel Separation:                    120 dB
>
> LM324 (Old design
> Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        40 nv/sqr(Hz)
> Channel Separation:                    120 dB
>
> TL072/074/082/084 (Low-noise
> Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        15 nv/sqr(Hz)
> Channel Separation:                    120 dB
>
> We can see that LM324 is actually not the best existing amplifier
> for audio purpose however there's much worse models usually used
> only in power aplications.
>
> Now let's take a look on one AD's modern component. OP470 is
> expensive operational amplifier dedicated especially for audio.
> It has the almost best electrical characteristics and it has
> supply and input conditions that perfectly fit for modular
> synthesizer purposes: ±18v supply, rail-to-rail input, large
> gain, hi-liniarity, etc. So, it fits as direct replacement for
> OpAmps used in certain models.
> It even encloses only in ceramic package.
>
> AD OP470
> Equivalent Input Noise Voltage:        5 nv/sqr(Hz)
> Channel Separation:                    125—155 dB
>
> The A-138 mixer has extremely simple schematics: four passive
> attenuators built around quad OpAmp and one more attenuator for
> master level. That's all. But it can be simply overloaded and is
> really noisy component.
>
> I've got trial amount of 6pcs OP470AY from China at price of 5$
> each and replaced standard OpAmp on the A-138 with it and guess
> what? The amplification chain noise just almost disappear and
> even dynamic range has increased (distortions are gone away)! So,
> i got possibility to increase both input and output level. I did
> not measure s/n ratio gain before and after replacement because
> it was clearly audible, as i said before. I beleive, it's about
> 40-60 dB. My test setup was like A110Sine->A-106-6LP2 (Closed, no
> reso.)->A130->A138
>
> A-138 costs about 50 Euro, so you need to add just $5—15 to get
> high-quality OpAmp and you'll get a much better mixer.
>
> I also got similar improvements replacing OpAmp on the A-116, but
> has no significant result on Dark Energy, A-130, A-119 and none
> on any of my filters. (alas, these module type is really noisy!)
> But i believe OP470 must fit to simple mixer-like modules used
> for audio such as panners, x-faders, matrix mixer, maybe to some
> pre-amps or VCAs. Also many modules such as oscillators have
> output buffers or input pre-amps at there's non-zero chance to
> make it better. I'll return to my investigations later when i
> receive Hi-end VCO and VC Panner modules.
>
> It would be highly appreciated if somebody who will try to
> improve his own mixer following this post, he will take the
> opportunity to test other modules, even non-Doepfer. The
> replacement is simple done with screwdriver (or chip-removing
> tool) because every IC on Doepfer modules is placed thru DIP-panel.
>
> You can also try to install other OpAmps, like TL-082 (but
> changes would not be dramatical) or maybe another AD, THAT, etc
> production.
>
> Also if any of the Doepfer representatives will read it, maybe
> you also so some research about this matter? It may be
> interesting to add additional items to catalog and it takes
> nothing. Also, maybe you will produce some "low-noise hi-end
> multimode filter" using this simple idea?
>
> Best regards,
> Dmitry Shtatnov
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-06-28 by therpocc

Dear Dieter, i'm glad to hear about your interest.
Concerning the price: you pricelist includes different rack cases having different cost, items such as Hi-End VCO, blue-LED versions of modules and other items. Offering high-fidelity might be just another option. (Finally it can be just another OEM items such as CEM chips, LEDs, sockets etc)
I'm not a professional engineer, but you are. So, i believe you can find some more cost-effective components with quality close to this particular Analog Devices component but higher then just plain TL064...
Anyway, thanks for your interest.
Best regards,
Dmitry

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <yahoo@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Dmitry,
> 
> thank you for the detailed report. That was interesting for me too.
> Unfortunately the OP470 is very expensive (~ Euro 15 here in Germany) and
> would increase the price of the modules clearly.
> 
> Best wishes
> Dieter Doepfer

Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-03 by thomas_escure

Hi Dmitry,

I also am very interested about the possibility of replacing ICs to increase the audio quality of my beloved Doepfer modules.

For example, I used to have problems with my A-131s : the noisefloor was a little too high for my tastes and when I tried to increase the input level I wasn't pleased by the distortion.

Then a very kind fellow on Muffwiggler's forum suggested that I replace the LM324 IC (responsible for audio duties) by an LME49740. The difference, to my ears, was astonishing ! So I did this very simple mod on my three A-131s and now I love the A-131, it has become my favorite VCA (and I tried about 6 from different makers).

It must be noted that the IC swap does not really lower the noisefloor, but it handles higher input levels much better (in my opinion) so that noise becomes inaudible. Also when I really push it into distortion I like the caracter of the sound.

I do not own an A-138 for the moment but I will sure try this AD OP470 IC when I get one.

Please let me know if you can find other good sounding ICs for Doepfer modules !

Dieter, if you're reading this please be sure that I greatly respect your work.
I understand that compromises have to be made when running a product line, that I think is well appreciated by a lot of customers.

Best regards,

Thomas

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "therpocc" <dmitry.shtatnov@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Dear Dieter, i'm glad to hear about your interest.
> Concerning the price: you pricelist includes different rack cases having different cost, items such as Hi-End VCO, blue-LED versions of modules and other items. Offering high-fidelity might be just another option. (Finally it can be just another OEM items such as CEM chips, LEDs, sockets etc)
> I'm not a professional engineer, but you are. So, i believe you can find some more cost-effective components with quality close to this particular Analog Devices component but higher then just plain TL064...
> Anyway, thanks for your interest.
> Best regards,
> Dmitry
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <yahoo@> wrote:
> >
> > Dmitry,
> > 
> > thank you for the detailed report. That was interesting for me too.
> > Unfortunately the OP470 is very expensive (~ Euro 15 here in Germany) and
> > would increase the price of the modules clearly.
> > 
> > Best wishes
> > Dieter Doepfer
>

Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-03 by Jim Credland

I chucked the lm324s out of a previous design here, the dirty cheap and pin compatible tl084 sounds lots better. I think the slew rate was killing me. Alright for fast signals as long as the voltages were low, but with a 7v peak to peak signal it's gotta be rolling off at the top ...

On 3 Jul 2012, at 12:55, "thomas_escure" <thomas_escure@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> 
> 
> Hi Dmitry,
> 
> I also am very interested about the possibility of replacing ICs to increase the audio quality of my beloved Doepfer modules.
> 
> For example, I used to have problems with my A-131s : the noisefloor was a little too high for my tastes and when I tried to increase the input level I wasn't pleased by the distortion.
> 
> Then a very kind fellow on Muffwiggler's forum suggested that I replace the LM324 IC (responsible for audio duties) by an LME49740. The difference, to my ears, was astonishing ! So I did this very simple mod on my three A-131s and now I love the A-131, it has become my favorite VCA (and I tried about 6 from different makers).
> 
> It must be noted that the IC swap does not really lower the noisefloor, but it handles higher input levels much better (in my opinion) so that noise becomes inaudible. Also when I really push it into distortion I like the caracter of the sound.
> 
> I do not own an A-138 for the moment but I will sure try this AD OP470 IC when I get one.
> 
> Please let me know if you can find other good sounding ICs for Doepfer modules !
> 
> Dieter, if you're reading this please be sure that I greatly respect your work.
> I understand that compromises have to be made when running a product line, that I think is well appreciated by a lot of customers.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Thomas
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "therpocc" <dmitry.shtatnov@...> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Dieter, i'm glad to hear about your interest.
> > Concerning the price: you pricelist includes different rack cases having different cost, items such as Hi-End VCO, blue-LED versions of modules and other items. Offering high-fidelity might be just another option. (Finally it can be just another OEM items such as CEM chips, LEDs, sockets etc)
> > I'm not a professional engineer, but you are. So, i believe you can find some more cost-effective components with quality close to this particular Analog Devices component but higher then just plain TL064...
> > Anyway, thanks for your interest.
> > Best regards,
> > Dmitry
> > 
> > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, <yahoo@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dmitry,
> > > 
> > > thank you for the detailed report. That was interesting for me too.
> > > Unfortunately the OP470 is very expensive (~ Euro 15 here in Germany) and
> > > would increase the price of the modules clearly.
> > > 
> > > Best wishes
> > > Dieter Doepfer
> >
> 
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-03 by Jim Credland

On 3 Jul 2012, at 21:11, Jim Credland <jim@cernproductions.com> wrote:

> I chucked the lm324s out of a previous design here, the dirty cheap and pin compatible tl084 sounds lots better. I think the slew rate was killing me. Alright for fast signals as long as the voltages were low, but with a 7v peak to peak signal it's gotta be rolling off at the top
> 

Just to finish my own email. I think the 324 is about 0.5v/us, which if my mental math is right must mean it starts to do bad things at about 5khz.  I didn't measure the noise - i imagine there are better chips than the 84 for that.  
J


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-04 by therpocc

Correct me if i wrong, but 0.4v/us is right how much wee need to process 10vpp ideal 20 kHz triangle waveform. One half-cycle is equal to 10v slew in 25us. Simple calculations give us exactly 0.4v/us to achieve this slew rate. Maybe this parameter is often overrated or requires some special conditions like +-18v power or some specific input impedance range?

btw, if slew rate is so important parameter, we can try to replace OA in an oscillator and possible increase frequency range. I'll try to mess up with it later.

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Jim Credland <jim@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> 
> 
> On 3 Jul 2012, at 21:11, Jim Credland <jim@...> wrote:
> 
> > I chucked the lm324s out of a previous design here, the dirty cheap and pin compatible tl084 sounds lots better. I think the slew rate was killing me. Alright for fast signals as long as the voltages were low, but with a 7v peak to peak signal it's gotta be rolling off at the top
> > 
> 
> Just to finish my own email. I think the 324 is about 0.5v/us, which if my mental math is right must mean it starts to do bad things at about 5khz.  I didn't measure the noise - i imagine there are better chips than the 84 for that.  
> J
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-04 by sean_process

I've also had some slight improvements by replacing TL06x with TL07x or OP475 in mixer modules and the HPF, but my old A-131s are the early version where the TL072 is just for CV input. Some of the improvement I'm hearing I'm sure is pure placebo, but that's fine with me.

What we need to bear in mind is that the TL062 is designed as a low power device and uses a mere 0.5 mA of supply, but the OP470 uses 11 mA. No problem if you've swapping one or two op-amps, but if you replace a whole load then whatever signal to noise improvements you might hear will be useless when your oscillators go all wobbly because your PSU isn't up to the job.

If you replace many TL06x or 7x opamps you will definitely need a bigger PSU and might need to consider where to dump the extra heat as well.

Sean

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Jim Credland <jim@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> I did the math in my head last night, but just repeated now on paper. Looks like you need to go low to high in 25us for a 20khz signal. You'd need close to a 1v per us slew. I think? Check my working :) 
> 
> Sent from my fone
> 
> On 4 Jul 2012, at 07:06, "therpocc" <dmitry.shtatnov@...> wrote:
> 
> > Correct me if i wrong, but 0.4v/us is right how much wee need to process 10vpp ideal 20 kHz triangle waveform. One half-cycle is equal to 10v slew in 25us. Simple calculations give us exactly 0.4v/us to achieve this slew rate. Maybe this parameter is often overrated or requires some special conditions like +-18v power or some specific input impedance range?
> > 
> > btw, if slew rate is so important parameter, we can try to replace OA in an oscillator and possible increase frequency range. I'll try to mess up with it later.
> > 
> > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Jim Credland <jim@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 3 Jul 2012, at 21:11, Jim Credland <jim@> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I chucked the lm324s out of a previous design here, the dirty cheap and pin compatible tl084 sounds lots better. I think the slew rate was killing me. Alright for fast signals as long as the voltages were low, but with a 7v peak to peak signal it's gotta be rolling off at the top
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Just to finish my own email. I think the 324 is about 0.5v/us, which if my mental math is right must mean it starts to do bad things at about 5khz. I didn't measure the noise - i imagine there are better chips than the 84 for that. 
> > > J
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-04 by Jim Credland

I did the math in my head last night, but just repeated now on paper. Looks like you need to go low to high in 25us for a 20khz signal. You'd need close to a 1v per us slew. I think? Check my working :) 

Sent from my fone

On 4 Jul 2012, at 07:06, "therpocc" <dmitry.shtatnov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Correct me if i wrong, but 0.4v/us is right how much wee need to process 10vpp ideal 20 kHz triangle waveform. One half-cycle is equal to 10v slew in 25us. Simple calculations give us exactly 0.4v/us to achieve this slew rate. Maybe this parameter is often overrated or requires some special conditions like +-18v power or some specific input impedance range?
> 
> btw, if slew rate is so important parameter, we can try to replace OA in an oscillator and possible increase frequency range. I'll try to mess up with it later.
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Jim Credland <jim@...> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > On 3 Jul 2012, at 21:11, Jim Credland <jim@...> wrote:
> > 
> > > I chucked the lm324s out of a previous design here, the dirty cheap and pin compatible tl084 sounds lots better. I think the slew rate was killing me. Alright for fast signals as long as the voltages were low, but with a 7v peak to peak signal it's gotta be rolling off at the top
> > > 
> > 
> > Just to finish my own email. I think the 324 is about 0.5v/us, which if my mental math is right must mean it starts to do bad things at about 5khz. I didn't measure the noise - i imagine there are better chips than the 84 for that. 
> > J
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> 
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Doepfer_a100] Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-04 by Jim Credland

http://twitter.com/voodooinsomnia/status/174212953179041793/photo/1/large

Here - I thought I'd taken a picture. LM358 is the slow looking trace.  5V per div, 20us X scale. 

On 4 Jul 2012, at 14:46, Jim Credland wrote:

> I did the math in my head last night, but just repeated now on paper. Looks like you need to go low to high in 25us for a 20khz signal. You'd need close to a 1v per us slew. I think? Check my working :) 
> 
> Sent from my fone
> 
> On 4 Jul 2012, at 07:06, "therpocc" <dmitry.shtatnov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Correct me if i wrong, but 0.4v/us is right how much wee need to process 10vpp ideal 20 kHz triangle waveform. One half-cycle is equal to 10v slew in 25us. Simple calculations give us exactly 0.4v/us to achieve this slew rate. Maybe this parameter is often overrated or requires some special conditions like +-18v power or some specific input impedance range?
> > 
> > btw, if slew rate is so important parameter, we can try to replace OA in an oscillator and possible increase frequency range. I'll try to mess up with it later.
> > 
> > --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Jim Credland <jim@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 3 Jul 2012, at 21:11, Jim Credland <jim@...> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I chucked the lm324s out of a previous design here, the dirty cheap and pin compatible tl084 sounds lots better. I think the slew rate was killing me. Alright for fast signals as long as the voltages were low, but with a 7v peak to peak signal it's gotta be rolling off at the top
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Just to finish my own email. I think the 324 is about 0.5v/us, which if my mental math is right must mean it starts to do bad things at about 5khz. I didn't measure the noise - i imagine there are better chips than the 84 for that. 
> > > J
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > 
> > 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: Reducing the A-138a/b noise with OP470.

2012-07-06 by memestudio

OPA4134 is a really good quad op amp choice for audio.
Ciao
Fabio

--- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, "therpocc" <dmitry.shtatnov@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Correct me if i wrong, but 0.4v/us is right how much wee need to process 10vpp ideal 20 kHz triangle waveform. One half-cycle is equal to 10v slew in 25us. Simple calculations give us exactly 0.4v/us to achieve this slew rate. Maybe this parameter is often overrated or requires some special conditions like +-18v power or some specific input impedance range?
> 
> btw, if slew rate is so important parameter, we can try to replace OA in an oscillator and possible increase frequency range. I'll try to mess up with it later.
> 
> --- In Doepfer_a100@yahoogroups.com, Jim Credland <jim@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > On 3 Jul 2012, at 21:11, Jim Credland <jim@> wrote:
> > 
> > > I chucked the lm324s out of a previous design here, the dirty cheap and pin compatible tl084 sounds lots better. I think the slew rate was killing me. Alright for fast signals as long as the voltages were low, but with a 7v peak to peak signal it's gotta be rolling off at the top
> > > 
> > 
> > Just to finish my own email. I think the 324 is about 0.5v/us, which if my mental math is right must mean it starts to do bad things at about 5khz.  I didn't measure the noise - i imagine there are better chips than the 84 for that.  
> > J
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.