From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

So, now that the TI folks have die-shrunk the NE5532 and broken decades
of designs that were optimized for those chips, what are the popular alternatives? We have so many circuits optimized for 22k input Z and
8K output Z to get the lowest possible distortion.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> writes:

So, now that the TI folks have die-shrunk the NE5532 and broken decades
of designs that were optimized for those chips, what are the popular alternatives? We have so many circuits optimized for 22k input Z and
8K output Z to get the lowest possible distortion.

I don't know about popular but speaking of lowest possible distortion
getting off 15 volt rails works for me.

Billy Y..
--
rol -(sp) ; save carry
.purge #lun.sr ; dump open .cstat channel
ror (sp)+ ; pop carry
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

In article <10vr8kf$c98$1@reader1.panix.com>, <billy@MIX.COM> wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> writes:

So, now that the TI folks have die-shrunk the NE5532 and broken decades
of designs that were optimized for those chips, what are the popular
alternatives? We have so many circuits optimized for 22k input Z and
8K output Z to get the lowest possible distortion.

I don't know about popular but speaking of lowest possible distortion
getting off 15 volt rails works for me.

Well, the new "5532" now has +/-15V maximum, unlike the normal +/-22V ones.
So I suspect they changed the process and not just the layout.

Last night I did an open-loop Bode plot and the new chip doesn't have the
three humps, so I am suspecting that this is more than just a process change and a die shrink, but it's also a complete topology change.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

On 6/4/26 08:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Well, the new "5532" now has +/-15V maximum, unlike the normal +/-22V ones.
So I suspect they changed the process and not just the layout.

Last night I did an open-loop Bode plot and the new chip doesn't have the
three humps, so I am suspecting that this is more than just a process change and a die shrink, but it's also a complete topology change.
--scott
--
EEVblog details the changes here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22ZmmZ67SMY


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

On 04/06/2026 13:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:

In article <10vr8kf$c98$1@reader1.panix.com>, <billy@MIX.COM> wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> writes:

So, now that the TI folks have die-shrunk the NE5532 and broken decades
of designs that were optimized for those chips, what are the popular
alternatives? We have so many circuits optimized for 22k input Z and
8K output Z to get the lowest possible distortion.

I don't know about popular but speaking of lowest possible distortion
getting off 15 volt rails works for me.

Well, the new "5532" now has +/-15V maximum, unlike the normal +/-22V ones. So I suspect they changed the process and not just the layout.

Last night I did an open-loop Bode plot and the new chip doesn't have the three humps, so I am suspecting that this is more than just a process change and a die shrink, but it's also a complete topology change.
--scott

Looking at the number and type of the changes, should they not have
changed the part number? Leaving aside those currently using it in new equipment, who can probably design round the changes, what happens when someone repairs an item and can't make it function as it should because
the replacement chip is now, in effect, leaving the factory with faults?
Or even blows up because the power rails are okay for the old version,
but too high for the new one?
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:

Looking at the number and type of the changes, should they not have
changed the part number? Leaving aside those currently using it in new >equipment, who can probably design round the changes, what happens when >someone repairs an item and can't make it function as it should because
the replacement chip is now, in effect, leaving the factory with faults?
Or even blows up because the power rails are okay for the old version,
but too high for the new one?

They should have changed the part number.

They should have warned customers.

They should have given an opportunity for a last-chance buy.

They should have done a lot of things rather than leave people to find
out when their boards hit QA testing.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.audio.pro

On 5/06/2026 3:13 am, Paul Babiak wrote:

On 6/4/26 08:16, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Well, the new "5532" now has +/-15V maximum, unlike the normal +/-22V ones. So I suspect they changed the process and not just the layout.

Last night I did an open-loop Bode plot and the new chip doesn't have the three humps, so I am suspecting that this is more than just a process
change
and a die shrink, but it's also a complete topology change.
--scott

Some online suppliers still showing NE5532 SOIC from ONSEMI with 3-20V
spec.

All the suppliers appear to have updated their specs to the max +/-15V
for the TI versions.

A good market developing for 'vintage' DIP8 ones ?!!!
--
geoff
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2