[imran27]

Imran, you are right about the combo of 1692/49720/209, the low end felt a bit slow on that. For the gain stage I have preferred the OPA209 only with warmer Opamps that lean towards the low end like the OPA1652, which was a revelation, I had tried this Opamp earlier with OPA1611 in the gain stage and the combo had become too warm and thick. The 1652 with 209 in the gain stage sounds more in control and gorgeous. The OPA1692 and OPA2209 appear a bit harsh on the top end with the OPA209, however NE5534 the stock Opamp reigns the harshness in very nicely. In fact I am coming back to the stock Opamp NE5534 in the gain stage more often. For me the best combos currently are:

3 x OPA1692 + 2 x NE5534
3 x LME49720 + 2 x NE5534
3 x OPA2209 + 2 x NE5534
3 x OPA1652 + 2 x OPA209

I am finding myself sticking to the same dual part in all 3 dual stages, it gives the best synergy and true representation of the signature IMO but that could be just my belief. Out of the Above I like the combo with1692 and the one with 1652 the best. Next I am thinking of trying the Sparks discrete parts. Haven’t tried any discrete Opamps yet.

That is what didn't come to my mind.

Will try NE5534 and 3x other opamps in the new revision.

Very hopeful about LME49720, OPA1692 and their mixture

 

[Wiljen]

Received the new tour unit just as I was headed out the door last week. Starting to do some listening today. So far, very impressed.

 

[imran27]

Imran, you are right about the combo of 1692/49720/209, the low end felt a bit slow on that. For the gain stage I have preferred the OPA209 only with warmer Opamps that lean towards the low end like the OPA1652, which was a revelation, I had tried this Opamp earlier with OPA1611 in the gain stage and the combo had become too warm and thick. The 1652 with 209 in the gain stage sounds more in control and gorgeous. The OPA1692 and OPA2209 appear a bit harsh on the top end with the OPA209, however NE5534 the stock Opamp reigns the harshness in very nicely. In fact I am coming back to the stock Opamp NE5534 in the gain stage more often. For me the best combos currently are:

3 x OPA1692 + 2 x NE5534
3 x LME49720 + 2 x NE5534
3 x OPA2209 + 2 x NE5534
3 x OPA1652 + 2 x OPA209

I am finding myself sticking to the same dual part in all 3 dual stages, it gives the best synergy and true representation of the signature IMO but that could be just my belief. Out of the Above I like the combo with1692 and the one with 1652 the best. Next I am thinking of trying the Sparks discrete parts. Haven’t tried any discrete Opamps yet.

Just tried 3x OPA1692 and 2x NE5534D
Initially it sounded like you exactly told, musical, everything sounded like well brought together.

But no, it is no way superior to 2x OPA209 especially when bypassed wth Nichicon VZ (Though Play itself has Supply to GND bypass, 47uF/25V SILMIC II, I feel for supply bypassing SILMIC II isn't the best)

Just the amount of background is visible (audible).
I can see there's a lot more lush in the background of NE5534D compared to OPA209. OPA209 (VZ) is extremely clean. The very moment you concentrate on how clean the bass notes and instruments in the upper mids and highs sound you'll instantly notice how clean OPA209 is compared to NE5534D.

Also, I think it is because of the VZ caps that bass is slightly meatier on OPA209.
Will try the new 35V PW caps which as per specs have the lowest ESR so technically, lowest ripple voltage due to supply current ripple. Also remaining to check are Panasonic FM caps

The soundstage, imaging, just excellent with OPA209, NE5534D in those regards is not very good.

I just wish the highs and overall tonal balance of OPA1692 was closet to LME49720. I guess for the speed and clarity OPA1692 provides, this is a trade off we have to live with.

 

[thenappyone]

Has anyone used the 3.5mm mic input with any success? I am trying to use this with an antlion modmic5 with limited success. I get a brief burst of static noise at random intervals and can't seem to reproduce it. Is it possible that this is a ground loop problem that is manifesting in the mic audio? I've tried moving the electrical source of the burson to a different outlet as the pc with no success. Although i don't believe those two outlets are on different breakers.

I have of of these coming https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XB9YBHJ

Hopefully that isolator will do the trick.

 

[raoultrifan]

"12 Mbps support USB 1.5 Mbps at low speed and full speed does not support pure high-speed equipment" - so don't use it with USB 2.0 devices unless you want to downgrade them to 24-bit/96kHz output.

I was using a PLANTRONICS headset that worked just fine on my PLAY, what PCB revision do you got there?

 

[C-Bass]

Has anyone used the 3.5mm mic input with any success? I am trying to use this with an antlion modmic5 with limited success. I get a brief burst of static noise at random intervals and can't seem to reproduce it. Is it possible that this is a ground loop problem that is manifesting in the mic audio? I've tried moving the electrical source of the burson to a different outlet as the pc with no success. Although i don't believe those two outlets are on different breakers.

I have of of these coming https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XB9YBHJ

Hopefully that isolator will do the trick.

I’ve had zero issues with the mic and have used mod mic 4 and Vmoda boom pro on a regular basis. I’d contact burson that does not seem normal at all. Or perhaps try a different mic if possible to ensure it’s not the mod mic. I’m not a huge fan of the mod mic and think it is horribly overpriced for what it is.

 

[thenappyone]

"12 Mbps support USB 1.5 Mbps at low speed and full speed does not support pure high-speed equipment" - so don't use it with USB 2.0 devices unless you want to downgrade them to 24-bit/96kHz output.

I was using a PLANTRONICS headset that worked just fine on my PLAY, what PCB revision do you got there?

i'm not sure what you mean by the don't use it with USB 2.0 devices, I'm using the 3.5mm mic in. The only USB connection is to my PC, which has only USB 2.0 or 3.1. I received this unit directly from Burson on May 7 2018, so i'm assuming since the latest revision is shipping I have the most current board.

I’ve had zero issues with the mic and have used mod mic 4 and Vmoda boom pro on a regular basis. I’d contact burson that does not seem normal at all. Or perhaps try a different mic if possible to ensure it’s not the mod mic. I’m not a huge fan of the mod mic and think it is horribly overpriced for what it is.

I had my reservations about the mod mic due to some of the reviews, but the poor audio experiences were with on-board sound and it seems that numerous complaints are resolved with additional power to the mic via a usb adapter. I figured the Burson, being purpose built for this type of application, would deliver plenty of power to the mic. There were no specs that i could find on the mic input though. I unfortunately do not have another mic i could try. I do have a ground loop issue that i am currently trying to resolve and hopefully this is just a symptom of that.

 

[raoultrifan]

i'm not sure what you mean by the don't use it with USB 2.0 devices, I'm using the 3.5mm mic in. The only USB connection is to my PC, which has only USB 2.0 or 3.1. [...]

I am referring to https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06XB9YBHJ: "12 Mbps support USB 1.5 Mbps at low speed and full speed does not support pure high-speed equipment" - so don't use it with USB 2.0 devices unless you want to downgrade them to 24-bit/96kHz output.

 

[imran27]

Till now, of all configurations I love this the most, I/V, LP, Gain:
LME49860 bypassed with 35V Nichicon PW (35V have lowest ESR)
OPA1692
OPA209 bypassed with 50V Nichicon VZ (Tempted to get 35V variants of these as well)

With Nichicon PW bypass, OPA1692 reveals a lot more flaws of itself. Slight dip in upper mids and mid~upper bass region. Makes sub bass and highs pronounced but since highs have slight roll off it sounds extended but never harsh. Hence they sound darker too.

But in the current configuration I can say for sure, LME49860 is more detailed and natural. So much as it is the most realistic sounding. But too much of it, especially in form of LME49720 ended p being slow. But since those LME49720 were DIP, it wasn't possible to rail-to-rail bypass them.

Now I am very tempted to get the 35V variant of Nichicon VZ and a couple of LME49860 (bypassed with 35V Nichicon PW) to try in LP stage. I might need another cap for bypassing the LP stage opamps since PW has too much extension in highs (pairs well with VZ which has rolled off highs).

I honestly think ELNA SILMIC II aren't as great for supply bypassing. Probably great for signal path, but for supply bypass certainly not as good as many others I have tried.

Yet to try Panasonic FM for rail-to-rail bypass. At least as per specs they seem extremely competent.

Will keep the thread updated.

 

[selvakumar]

Till now, of all configurations I love this the most, I/V, LP, Gain:
LME49860 bypassed with 35V Nichicon PW (35V have lowest ESR)
OPA1692
OPA209 bypassed with 50V Nichicon VZ (Tempted to get 35V variants of these as well)

With Nichicon PW bypass, OPA1692 reveals a lot more flaws of itself. Slight dip in upper mids and mid~upper bass region. Makes sub bass and highs pronounced but since highs have slight roll off it sounds extended but never harsh. Hence they sound darker too.

But in the current configuration I can say for sure, LME49860 is more detailed and natural. So much as it is the most realistic sounding. But too much of it, especially in form of LME49720 ended p being slow. But since those LME49720 were DIP, it wasn't possible to rail-to-rail bypass them.

Now I am very tempted to get the 35V variant of Nichicon VZ and a couple of LME49860 (bypassed with 35V Nichicon PW) to try in LP stage. I might need another cap for bypassing the LP stage opamps since PW has too much extension in highs (pairs well with VZ which has rolled off highs).

I honestly think ELNA SILMIC II aren't as great for supply bypassing. Probably great for signal path, but for supply bypass certainly not as good as many others I have tried.

Yet to try Panasonic FM for rail-to-rail bypass. At least as per specs they seem extremely competent.

Will keep the thread updated.

post your circuit picture and update in the thread

 

[metalicblue]

I just got my PLAY yesterday and it came with Burson v5i in it. I was listening to my Beyers T1 and AKG K812 and decided to start rolling opa's in it.
So far I have tried:
1) 3x OPA 1692 and 2x OPA 209
2) 3x OPA 1692 and 2x v5i single
3) 3x v5i double and 2xOPA 209
4) 3x v5i double and 2x v5i single
From what i can hear and regarding my headphones I concluded I will stay with the first option for the Beyers and probably the v5i for the AKG'S.
OPA1692+209 creates a magical surround stage with the Beyers without losing clarity and details while the v5i will tone down the analytical part of the Akg's and make them extremely musical.
By the way, coming from Xduoo xd05 I find that the PLAY is Bass shy not having a bass boost switch. Anyone else noticed this or am I just too picky?
Anyway, I find the Play to be a great amp dac combo and any combination of the rolled opa's gave a pleasant listening experience. This is a keeper or at least till I will have finance for a more expensive one.
Happy listening!

 

[imran27]

I just got my PLAY yesterday and it came with Burson v5i in it. I was listening to my Beyers T1 and AKG K812 and decided to start rolling opa's in it.
So far I have tried:
1) 3x OPA 1692 and 2x OPA 209
2) 3x OPA 1692 and 2x v5i single
3) 3x v5i double and 2xOPA 209
4) 3x v5i double and 2x v5i single
From what i can hear and regarding my headphones I concluded I will stay with the first option for the Beyers and probably the v5i for the AKG'S.
OPA1692+209 creates a magical surround stage with the Beyers without losing clarity and details while the v5i will tone down the analytical part of the Akg's and make them extremely musical.
By the way, coming from Xduoo xd05 I find that the PLAY is Bass shy not having a bass boost switch. Anyone else noticed this or am I just too picky?
Anyway, I find the Play to be a great amp dac combo and any combination of the rolled opa's gave a pleasant listening experience. This is a keeper or at least till I will have finance for a more expensive one.
Happy listening!

I too am coming from XD-05 and yes, I have DT 1990 and indeed 3x OPA1692 2x OPA209 is amazing. I recommend try 1x LME49860 in I/V

The bass shy comparison to XD-05 is the coloration from OPA1612. It has a huge sub bass. If you put OPA1612 in I/V you will get somewhat similar kind of sub bass and bass presence as XD-05.

 

[Eiffel]

.
I recommend try 1x LME49860 in I/V.

You want to say 2, not one I think. It has 2 I/V OP-AMPs and 1 LPF...

 

[raoultrifan]

This has been discussed already.
2 x I/V op-amps and 1 x LPF op-amp.

However, not sure why would someone want to use LME49860 which is noisier than LME49720 and it's only intended to be used in >36V powered equipment. I would honestly stick to LME49720 or upgrade to MUSES8820 or AD8599 etc.

In my tests the best SNR and also the highest bit-resolution was achieved with 3 x AD8599 + 2 x AD797 (or 2 x MUSES8820 with DYI dual-to-single adapters). Also, lowest DC-output was achieved with same op-amps too.

P.S.: LME49860 was noisier than LME49720 in every configuration and DAC and headamp I ever tried (maybe I got a strange batch of LME49860). I'm not speaking about night and day difference, but it was a difference unexpected by me, especially that these 2 op-amps are sharing the same datasheet, just power voltage is different (+/-22V instead of +/-18V).

 

[WilliamLeonhart]

I have 2x8820 in IV and 8920 in LP. What would be the best (cleanest?) to put in single slots without breaking the bank?