Wiim Pro+ OPAMP replace

brjoon1021 said:
Sorry. I thought the 1656 was the ideal one.... I don't know... And a poster suggested that the original opamp is bipolar and should be or must be replaced by a bipolar ?
I generally like the sound of MOSFETs or jfets better than bipolar so wondering about this
Click to expand...
I see a fundamental lack of knowledge. Why do you want to install a dual channel opamp instead of a single channel opamp? It will destroy your wiim and or opamp.
Just because the type number of the opamp is higher, it does not necessarily mean that it is better and it is not at all certain that it can be replaced.
If you are not aware of the type and function of the opamp, do nothing or replace it with OPA1611.
If you want a FET at all costs, you can try the OPA627 type. Many people have already replaced 5534 with 627 in various applications and it seems to work well.
I know OPA627 is 1029 less than OPA 1656
Search for it on google for OPA627 and OPA1655! for 5534 replace
No one can tell you the difference between an OPA1655 and an OPA1611 in a Wiim. You will always get different opinions.
What is certain and the consensus is that the OPA1611 is better than the 5534
 
Last edited:
zacci said:
I see a fundamental lack of knowledge. Why do you want to install a dual channel opamp instead of a single channel opamp? It will destroy your wiim and or opamp.
Just because the type number of the opamp is higher, it does not necessarily mean that it is better and it is not at all certain that it can be replaced.
If you are not aware of the type and function of the opamp, do nothing or replace it with OPA1611.
If you want a FET at all costs, you can try the OPA627 type. Many people have already replaced 5534 with 627 and it is supposed to work fine.
I know OPA627 is 1029 less than OPA 1656
Search for it on google for OPA627 and OPA1655! for 5534 replace
No one can tell you the difference between an OPA1655 and an OPA1611 in a Wiim. You will always get different opinions.
What is certain and the consensus is that the OPA1611 is better than the 5534
Click to expand...
it's a bit more complicated....you will encounter situations or subjective appreciations where the 553* may be preferred...sometimes the tonal balance can be unbalanced when changing aop rolling etc....the 553* remains current in many applications, even professional ones.... I personally put back them after many tests of the latest fashionable AOPs in somes situations....
but the same evb of akm we were probably based on 1611 and we can suspect that for a sudden story that the 553* are back....
(honestly the only relevant test would be to put side by side a device mounted in 1611 and one in 5534 (which remains an astonishing AOP despite its "antique" age)
in all these areas...certainties are only made to be "dismantled" ;-)
 
Last edited:
canard said:
it's a bit more complicated....you will encounter situations or subjective appreciations where the 553* may be preferred...sometimes the tonal balance can be unbalanced when changing aop rolling etc....the 553* remains current in many applications, even professional ones.... I personally put back them after many tests of the latest fashionable AOPs in somes situations....
but the same evb of akm we were probably based on 1611 and we can suspect that for a sudden story that the 553* are back....
(honestly the only relevant test would be to put side by side a device mounted in 1611 and one in 5534 (which remains an astonishing AOP despite its "antique" age)
in all these areas...certainties are only made to be "dismantled" ;-)
Click to expand...
I totally agree with your opinion.I was talking about the difference in general terms. Most of the exchanges ended with a positive result. And of course there was a case when 5534 was returned to its original place. There may be several reasons for this, but ultimately the subjective impression decides.
I don't believe in instrumental measurements. In many cases it is misleading. Our ears are not linear either.
 
zacci said:
I totally agree with your opinion.I was talking about the difference in general terms. Most of the exchanges ended with a positive result. And of course there was a case when 5534 was returned to its original place. There may be several reasons for this, but ultimately the subjective impression decides.
I don't believe in instrumental measurements. In many cases it is misleading. Our ears are not linear either.
Click to expand...
One other option is the bipolar LME49710, the single version of lm4562. Its better than the 5534.
I dont agree that 5534 is a good sounding Op amp. In my opinion, even a 071 sounds better .
Opa 134 is a very good sounding FET OP and might also be an option.

As Zacci already said, a opa1611 is probably a safe and very good change.

I have some experience swapping ne5532 in Aiyima amplifiers to opa 1612 and lm4562, and I think the bass dynamics is slightly better with lm4562, and the soundstage more exact with opa1612.
 
Last edited:
Musician said:
One other option is the bipolar LME49710, the single version of lm4562. Its better than the 5534.
I dont agree that 5534 is a good sounding Op amp. In my opinion, even a 071 sounds better .
Opa 134 is a very good sounding FET OP and might also be an option.

As Zacci already said, a opa1611 is probably a safe and very good change.

I have some experience swapping ne5532 in Aiyima amplifiers to opa 1612 and lm4562, and I think the bass dynamics is slightly better with lm4562, and the soundstage more exact with opa1612.
Click to expand...
I came up with many possible solutions:

OPA627
OPA1611
AD8065

and yes, the lm47910 was also among them, but I didn't want to try it out, I just wanted a slightly better sound than the 5534. I didn't want to risk damaging the circuit with smd converters and many replacements. Of course, smd soldering points are not as strong as through-hole soldering.I would like to add that I think the 5534 has an excellent price/value ratio. I guess that's why it's widely used.
 
Thank you for that. That was a meaty read. I am going to consider it. Thank you kindly for posting it.

I have some doubts or at least concerns.

I got kicked off of audio science review, which I disagree with wholeheartedly and especially loathe the dickheads who moderate it so I generally don't agree with this viewpoint and especially that everything can be measured and quantified. For example there are recent psychoacoustic studies that have shown that areas in the brain light up when the ears are fed a 30,000 cycle pulse that do not light up when that pulse is absent. Explain that one If we understand all that is going on here.

1. A/D converters, D/A converters, amplifiers (including op-amps), preemplifiers that all measure well sound exactly the same, correct? That is the assertion of this article and the entire audio science review crowd. Am I correct?
- If that is true I challenge anyone of that viewpoint to get another well measuring amplifier or another digital to analog converter, preamp, put it in a system that they are used to, listening to music they are used to and tell me if it sounds exactly the same. Actually, one caveat, as I understand it Amir of ASR listens to one speaker sitting on top of a desk when he does his sound reviews That isn't a review of anything at least as a listening test. If you don't have a treated room and I don't mean expensive treatments but taking care and moving sh*t around to get rid of early reflections And if one doesn't have the speakers well away from the walls and carefully placed with reference to where you sit. If you're not taking soundstage into consideration then we don't really have anything to talk about, but ... With those things in place . That you can't tell the difference between these components is simply not the finding of many many people which I know are disrespected as audiofairies or unicorn lovers or whatever the hell...

Don't mistake my point though, mainly I want to say thank you for putting that up I appreciate you taking the concern. I read it I'm going to consider it and I'm even going to send it to the gentleman who is my tech and would do the op amp upgrade if I ask for it - The designer of the DAC I use, for his viewpoint. He has expensive test equipment he is an engineer And he is an audiofairy.
 
Unless you mean that's not what the article is propagating, because basically it is
 
brjoon1021 said:
Thank you for that. That was a meaty read. I am going to consider it. Thank you kindly for posting it.

I have some doubts or at least concerns.

I got kicked off of audio science review, which I disagree with wholeheartedly and especially loathe the dickheads who moderate it so I generally don't agree with this viewpoint and especially that everything can be measured and quantified. For example there are recent psychoacoustic studies that have shown that areas in the brain light up when the ears are fed a 30,000 cycle pulse that do not light up when that pulse is absent. Explain that one If we understand all that is going on here.
Click to expand...
The ASR membership includes many experts in the industry. They all know what they're talking about.

I'm certain that if you put your head in front of a radar, it would light up your brain pretty well, too. It's just as irrelevant to hearing as 30K cps.
 
Well I've had a lot of these discussions at ASR You're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you so there's really no point in continuing then
 
I'd like to keep this focused on the differences between the sound of op-amps for those who do believe that there is something to be gained by changing op-amps including the OP and almost everyone else who replied.

But, lastly, you do realize there's a difference between a radar wave and a sound wave? That was obfuscation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top