OT: What do you have against op-amps?!

[gez]

Ok, out of all the boosters I see schematics for, hardly anyone (I've seen one, and that was some time ago!) uses op-amps.  I see lots of people mentioning things like 'transparency' and then they recommend someone build something that uses little feedback and introduces far more distortion than a humble op-amp design would.  

For real transparency my first choice would be an op-amp, so what do you 'all' have against them?!  Just curious...

[smashinator]

I dunno, ICs look so "Corporate"   :wink:

[Paul Marossy]

I personally don't have anything against opamps.  

[Peter Snowberg]

I've got nothing against good opamps.

NE5532s sound fine to me.

[Paul Marossy]

Good point. Not all opamps are created equal. It's hard to beat the NE5532/5534 opamps for all around performance.

[petemoore]

...uh cause they only sort of sound like transistore?
 Nevermind...
 Because they're boxey looking, and with eight legs they might crawl away...
 Can't beat the 'ol 386 for gettin' a nice 1/2 V...

[aron]

I love op amps. Use em all the time.

[cd]

Easy:

(1) Simplicity.  I'll bet a dollar that the majority of all boutique boosters are copies of, or based on either (a) Orman's Minibooster (b) Orman's MOSFET booster (c) LPB (d) Rangemaster.  

(2) Mojo.  There's a big anti-opamp camp in the audiofool community.  Sad to say more and more audiofool ideas have infected the guitar FX community.  People will pay big bucks to put the exact right chip in their Supremo Distortion pedal but don't want them in a booster.

(3) Marketing.  Even if the builder doesn't know why (since they copied the circuit) it's much cooler to say "no opamps at all in this thing!" "based around super rare custom transistor like a vintage this-or-that" than "well, I used a cookbook circuit which is perfectly linear and perfectly boring".

[Jason Stout]

1. Because Brian May or (insert guitar God here) didn't use an opamp in his BOOSTER

2. Most opamps require a bipolar supply.

3.:shock:  Opamp Anxiety  :shock:

We need to take the steps to end the baloney nonsense discrete is better propaganda.

So...Just thinking aloud, how about getting a bootstrapped noninverting opamp booster worked out between us and name it after Aron's forum.

[Fret Wire]

They're fine with me, and they've been in effects long enough that some classic effects are to their credit. Like Paul & Peter said, the NE5532/5534 covers most ground, quietly and cheaply. Exception: the Dist. + and the 741.

Boosters, my favorite always was, and is the MicroAmp. I'll take it any day.

[ExpAnonColin]

Some op amp anxiety here, too...  sometimes I just can't seem to get them to work, and I haven't had any such problems with trannies.

-Colin

[WGTP]

I've only messed with the Rat and Muff Fuzz, but I think they are both great.  Still Until I built the Vulcan, I didn't realize the squishy I had been missing.  

[aron]

In my experience, op amps are very, very reliable. You provide power and they work. Transistors have been the opposite in terms of the number of different types and the biasing of FETs etc...

The Vulcan is a very different animal. Until that one, there was no squish like it  :lol:

[mikeb]

I prefer opamps for the reasons Aron mentioned, and for duals you can experiment very easily to see if different ones have a positive influence on the sound.

And, in any case, opamps are just a bunch of 'discrete' transistors chucked together anyway.....

Mike

[ildar]

An opamp fell on my brother from the window of the Susquehanna Hat Company. It killed him.

[Fret Wire]

Warning:... Way Huge's Swollen Pickle and Red Lama contain op-amps! Disgusting! Send them to me for disposal, I will pay postage.

[The Tone God]

2. Most opamps require a bipolar supply.

Since when ?

I personaly love opamps. They are SO easy to use once you understand how they work. I really don't know what people find so scary about them. I still use transistors when they are the best device for the particular job at hand but otherwise I use opamps whenever possible.

As for why they aren't as many opamp boaster circuits I would guess because there are only a few simple variations on a opamp boaster circuit so there aren't as many circuits out there where as there are MANY different transistor boaster circuits thus you see more of them. Possible also that single transistor boaster look less intimidating initally to a beginnner.

Andrew

[Hal]

just to spite you, i designed an op-amp based distortion!  actually, i saw this thread after i posted...

http://www.diystompboxes.com/sboxforum/viewtopic.php?t=24381

and btw, i have an op-amp preamp in by guitar.  741.  it can push headphones....therefore its awesome.

[Gilles C]

It's like asking me "why do I prefer tubes to op-amps?"  :roll:

Or why do I prefer sport cars to luxury cars?

What I don't like is that it's easier to do something with op-amps than transistors or FETs.

I also prefer the sound of FETs mixed with transistors to opamps.

An exception: this kind of op-amps... OPA2604

Never tried those but they are supposed to sound better than 5532

This is what they say about it:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
My top choice for neutrality, and the best sounding IC for audio is the
Burr-Brown OPA-2604/604.  It "sounds" like the best of the tube and
solid state worlds combined.  Smooth, effortless, tight bass, airy
extended highs with no grain, it does few things wrong.  It could have
less noise, but what noise is there intrudes to a lesser extent than the
spec would tend to indicate, has a decently low noise corner.

The other BB chips you mention also sound very good, maybe even better
than the 2604, but they are also VERY much more expensive.  The OPA-2604 definitely has the best bang for the buck.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From this page: http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/catch-1.htm

[David]

I don't have any problem with using op-amps whatsoever.  In fact, LF353s, 5534s, 5532s, TL071s and TL072s are all old friends of mine.  I'm rather "biased" toward using them -- precisely because they're so easy to bias.