|
It is currently 19 May 2012, 17:17
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 20 posts ] |
|
Better than LM386 on batteries?
| Author |
Message |
|
phaeton
|
 Better than LM386 on batteries?
Hello!
I intend to build a stereo headphone mixer/amp type device for mixing bass guitar signal and the output of an mp3 or cd player. The preamp will be a couple of TL082s or similar dual opamps (plus various stereo pots and filter circuits, etc), and for the power section my first pick was going to be a pair of LM386s. I was going to run it at 18V for the clean headroom, and I was going to leave the gain set at 20 instead of 200 (pins 1 and 8 not connected).
IIRC, even in this state, the 386 is actually overkill for headphone operation, and it tends to consume a lot of power. I would prefer this device to be battery powered (so I can walk around with it wirelessly). Are there any newer, more efficient, or lower-powered-but-adequate-for-headphones type of chipamps that anyone could recommend?
Or is battery life just the price you pay when you want to physically move stuff with electricity?
Thanks!
-phaeton
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:33 |
|
 |
|
Eeyore
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
phaeton wrote:
> Hello! > > I intend to build a stereo headphone mixer/amp type device for mixing > bass guitar signal and the output of an mp3 or cd player. The preamp > will be a couple of TL082s or similar dual opamps (plus various stereo > pots and filter circuits, etc), and for the power section my first pick > was going to be a pair of LM386s.
How loud do you want it to go ?
You can drive headphones from an op-amp output (typically via 100-150 ohms) if you don't need deafening volume.
I wouldn't suggest a TL082 for that stage btw, a 5532 would be a better choice.
Graham
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:33 |
|
 |
|
LAB
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
TDA7053 for a battery powered headphone amp; NJM4580 or NJM4560 give more power if you have +/- 12 or 15V. You can also use the two sections of a TL072 for each channel (FidoCAD, http://www.enetsystems.com/~lorenzo/fidocad_win.asp) : [FIDOCAD ] LI 65 70 65 55 LI 65 55 90 55 MC 95 75 0 0 080 LI 90 75 95 75 LI 65 80 65 90 LI 65 90 90 90 LI 90 90 90 75 SA 90 75 LI 110 75 105 75 MC 95 35 0 0 080 LI 90 55 90 35 SA 90 35 LI 90 35 95 35 LI 110 40 110 75 LI 105 35 110 35 LI 110 40 110 35 SA 65 30 SA 65 40 LI 110 55 125 55 LI 125 55 125 60 MC 125 80 0 0 045 LI 125 75 125 80 SA 125 75 SA 125 65 LI 125 60 125 65 TY 20 30 5 3 0 0 0 * OP AMP inputs TY 130 65 5 3 0 0 0 * Headphone SA 110 55 TY 70 45 5 3 0 0 0 * TL072 MC 65 70 0 0 580 TY 75 70 5 3 0 0 0 * b MC 65 30 0 0 580 TY 75 30 5 3 0 0 0 * a TY 90 25 4 2 0 0 0 * 100 or 150 Ohm TY 90 65 4 2 0 0 0 * 100 or 150 Ohm Gianluca
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
Brendan
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 phaeton wrote: > Hello! > > I intend to build a stereo headphone mixer/amp type device for mixing > bass guitar signal and the output of an mp3 or cd player. The preamp > will be a couple of TL082s or similar dual opamps (plus various stereo > pots and filter circuits, etc), and for the power section my first pick > was going to be a pair of LM386s. I was going to run it at 18V for the > clean headroom, and I was going to leave the gain set at 20 instead of > 200 (pins 1 and 8 not connected). > > IIRC, even in this state, the 386 is actually overkill for headphone > operation, and it tends to consume a lot of power. I would prefer this > device to be battery powered (so I can walk around with it wirelessly). > Are there any newer, more efficient, or > lower-powered-but-adequate-for-headphones type of chipamps that anyone > could recommend? > > Or is battery life just the price you pay when you want to physically > move stuff with electricity? > > Thanks! > > -phaeton Various places do specially designed headphone power amplifiers. National do a nice looking headphone amp: LM4882. I haven't tried it out but the specs look great. Furthermore, you can run it off 5volts if you want - no need for a noisy charge pump. - -- Brendan Gillatt brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk http://www.brendangillatt.co.ukPGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op= ... 0xBACD7433-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) iD8DBQFHZ/EakA9dCbrNdDMRAo1CAKDKquJy2PeWJuycC4pABz+4LOx1ZACfQGqO mkzxMDHm+HVMSPWcvjQ26Us= =26s6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
LAB
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
>> you can run it off 5volts if you want - no need for a noisy charge pump.
Yes, charge pump is very noisy. For audio I use NE555 / push pull 2SB1166+2SD1723 / a little toroidal transformer / fast diodes @120kHz... No Noise!
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
PhattyMo
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
Eeyore wrote: > > phaeton wrote: > >> Hello! >> >> I intend to build a stereo headphone mixer/amp type device for mixing >> bass guitar signal and the output of an mp3 or cd player. The preamp >> will be a couple of TL082s or similar dual opamps (plus various stereo >> pots and filter circuits, etc), and for the power section my first pick >> was going to be a pair of LM386s. > > How loud do you want it to go ? > > You can drive headphones from an op-amp output (typically via 100-150 > ohms) if you don't need deafening volume.
Google for "CMOY headphone amp" That should get you one such example. I've actually built a CMOY,not bad at all,for such a simple amp. It might have troubles driving low impedance 'phones to insanely high volumes,but it doesn't have any problem driving my 32ohm Panasonic's to ear-splitting levels. (well above any 'normal' listening level!). But I'm using +/- 9V rails,delivered by two small DC-DC converters. (salvaged from old 10meg Ethernet cards.)
> > I wouldn't suggest a TL082 for that stage btw, a 5532 would be a better > choice. > > Graham >
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
Clint
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
In message <476775AB.D3CA826F@hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> writes >You can drive headphones from an op-amp output (typically via 100-150 >ohms) if you don't need deafening volume. You can drive headphones from an op-amp *and* have deafening volume if you really want! Think LM48 and L165B plus any number of newer devices. > >I wouldn't suggest a TL082 for that stage btw, a 5532 would be a better >choice. > >Graham >
-- Clint Sharp
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
Eeyore
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
LAB wrote:
> >> you can run it off 5volts if you want - no need for a noisy charge pump. > > Yes, charge pump is very noisy. For audio I use NE555 / push pull > 2SB1166+2SD1723 / a little toroidal transformer / fast diodes @120kHz... No > Noise!
Where do yoiu get the little toroidal transformer ?
Graham
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
LAB
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
> Yes, charge pump is very noisy. For audio I use NE555 / push pull > 2SB1166+2SD1723 / a little toroidal transformer / fast diodes @120kHz... > No Noise!
>> Where do you get the little toroidal transformer ?
I salvage switching components everytime i get broken PSU's. I measured inductance of a few turns and chosen the core, only the core. Diameter is about 16mm. Primary is 24 turns 0.7mm, secondary is 80 turns 0.4mm, then I get +/-15Vcc rectifing + and - separatly. Primary L is about 120uH, frequency is 120kHz.
There is NO feedback. I thought: when I connect a transformer to 240Vac I rectifier the output, nothing else. Let's do the same... Negative feedback introduces low frequency (audio) noise due to the correction delay. If I have no feedback, I can't have noise before the switching frequency, that is 120kHz.
Gianluca
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
phaeton
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
Thanks everyone! Hopefully this long holiday weekend will afford me some time to breadboard up some bridged opamps. I presume that they'll automagically run like a Class AB. Special thanks to LAB for the link to FidoCAD. Excellent program! It's the stripped-down no- nonsense SPICE I've been looking for.
Graham, are you unrecommending the TL082 for the headphone driver, or just the whole circuit in general? And, why?
Also, *could* opamps drive a typical 4 or 8 ohm speaker without blowing up?
I had looked at the CMOY once a couple years before, and forgotten about it until PhattyMo just mentioned it. I forget why I didn't build it then, maybe because (at the time) I thought the opamps it lists are "special" somehow and they aren't carried by my fave distributor, or something. Maybe I should just try it out with the op amps I have.
Thanks again!
-phaeton
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
Eeyore
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
phaeton wrote:
> Thanks everyone! Hopefully this long holiday weekend will afford me > some time to breadboard up some bridged opamps. I presume that > they'll automagically run like a Class AB. Special thanks to LAB for > the link to FidoCAD. Excellent program! It's the stripped-down no- > nonsense SPICE I've been looking for. > > Graham, are you unrecommending the TL082 for the headphone driver,
Not the TL082 since its current drive isn't that good but a 5532 or 4560/4580 op-amp can drive headphones quite effectively if you use a 100 ohm series resistor.
> or just the whole circuit in general? And, why?
Because the LM386 has rubbish audio performance ! It's real dog of a chip.
> Also, *could* opamps drive a typical 4 or 8 ohm speaker without > blowing up?
They won't 'blow-up' because they have internal current limiting. They would however be entirely unsuitable as speaker drivers as they can only deliver some 30mA or so.
> I had looked at the CMOY once a couple years before, and forgotten > about it until PhattyMo just mentioned it. I forget why I didn't > build it then, maybe because (at the time) I thought the opamps it > lists are "special" somehow and they aren't carried by my fave > distributor, or something. Maybe I should just try it out with the op > amps I have.
His choice of op-amp is somewhat esoteric. You certainly don't need the OPA2132. Try what you have but the TL07/8x series isn't a good choice in this instance.
Graham
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
Brendan
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 phaeton wrote: > I had looked at the CMOY once a couple years before, and forgotten > about it until PhattyMo just mentioned it. I forget why I didn't > build it then, maybe because (at the time) I thought the opamps it > lists are "special" somehow and they aren't carried by my fave > distributor, or something. Maybe I should just try it out with the op > amps I have. Oh they are special - they're spectacularly expensive ;] The Burr-Brown parts have fantastic specs, however, if you need it. Furthermore, if your distributor doesn't carry them you can always request a couple of samples. From my experience TI seem pretty good to their customers, samples included. - From my memory of building a CMOY, I recall that the specs for the part he chose have an enormous current handling capability - ideal for driving speakers/headphones without clipping. Saying that, most regular op-amps will drive earphones to a decent level. If you are going to build a CMOY don't don't don't use a 9v battery - the life through a pair of 64ohm 'phones is, perhaps, 3 hours! Use some good NiMH AAAs or consider looking at lithium polymer batteries. - -- Brendan Gillatt brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk http://www.brendangillatt.co.ukPGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op= ... 0xBACD7433-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) iD8DBQFHbaiwkA9dCbrNdDMRAkS7AKDZeV1lWVRuKNPBl7vIiCJK9i8lbACgzG8a rCOFLA8W+KE1HgLcR4KhQ3o= =NX1E -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:34 |
|
 |
|
Eeyore
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
Brendan Gillatt wrote:
> phaeton wrote: > > > I had looked at the CMOY once a couple years before, and forgotten > > about it until PhattyMo just mentioned it. I forget why I didn't > > build it then, maybe because (at the time) I thought the opamps it > > lists are "special" somehow and they aren't carried by my fave > > distributor, or something. Maybe I should just try it out with the op > > amps I have. > > Oh they are special - they're spectacularly expensive ;] > The Burr-Brown parts have fantastic specs, however, if you need it.
It has insanely low THD figures (0.00008%). Somewhat better than the LM386's 0.1% or so.
> Furthermore, if your distributor doesn't carry them you can always > request a couple of samples. From my experience TI seem pretty good to > their customers, samples included. > > - From my memory of building a CMOY, I recall that the specs for the part > he chose have an enormous current handling capability - ideal for driving > speakers/headphones without clipping.
It's only +/- 40mA actually. A mere 2mA better than a 5532.
> Saying that, most regular op-amps will drive earphones to a decent level.
Don't forget the 100 ohm series resistor.
Graham
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
Brendan
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Eeyore wrote: >> - From my memory of building a CMOY, I recall that the specs for the part >> he chose have an enormous current handling capability - ideal for driving >> speakers/headphones without clipping. > > It's only +/- 40mA actually. A mere 2mA better than a 5532. My bad memory then! I thought it was in the range of 150-200mA. - -- Brendan Gillatt brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk http://www.brendangillatt.co.ukPGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op= ... 0xBACD7433-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) iD8DBQFHblyikA9dCbrNdDMRAiH5AKDf6XNG+Z+5AAih7AGEhFnqnGux7gCfV/9J PiT/EBMSuW/UbjkfXGtU/Tg= =+82V -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
phaeton
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
> > If you are going to build a CMOY don't don't don't use a 9v battery - the > life through a pair of 64ohm 'phones is, perhaps, 3 hours! Use some good > NiMH AAAs or consider looking at lithium polymer batteries. >
A 3 hour practice session on the guitar or bass probably should be followed by a break anyways.
That said.....Oh how i pine for the days when we will have small, safe, and adjustable nuclear power cells that will put out a constant amount of power and last forever. That may be lofty, but i sure hope that some huge revolution in battery technology is within the decade.
For this device, I was probably going to use rechargeables. Or just plug it in and deal with the lack of mobility. I even mused taking apart an old sony Discman, identifying the necessary circuit bits, and kitbashing my circuit and the Discman all into the same housing with a single power supply, but I guess I'm not that ambitious.
The Burr-Brown chips are significantly overspec'd for my application, at least as far as the THD figures are. Especially since I'm kinda sorta planning a distortion circuit for the instrument input anyways. Ideally, it would have that and some sort of mid-hump tone control, but the more I think about it, the more features I want to add, and I tend to overcomplicate everything I do. I've been trying to practice the K.I.S.S. philosophy. Just go back to the original plan of 3 simple audio channels each with their own separate volume and pan control. In any event, I've got 3 RC5532s in my parts collection. I'll still have to use TL082s or some other opamp for the rest.
Thanks! -phaeton
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
Brendan
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 phaeton wrote: > A 3 hour practice session on the guitar or bass probably should be > followed by a break anyways. > > That said.....Oh how i pine for the days when we will have small, > safe, and adjustable nuclear power cells that will put out a constant > amount of power and last forever. That may be lofty, but i sure hope > that some huge revolution in battery technology is within the decade. > > For this device, I was probably going to use rechargeables. Or just > plug it in and deal with the lack of mobility. I even mused taking > apart an old sony Discman, identifying the necessary circuit bits, and > kitbashing my circuit and the Discman all into the same housing with a > single power supply, but I guess I'm not that ambitious. > > The Burr-Brown chips are significantly overspec'd for my application, > at least as far as the THD figures are. Especially since I'm kinda > sorta planning a distortion circuit for the instrument input anyways. > Ideally, it would have that and some sort of mid-hump tone control, > but the more I think about it, the more features I want to add, and I > tend to overcomplicate everything I do. I've been trying to practice > the K.I.S.S. philosophy. Just go back to the original plan of 3 > simple audio channels each with their own separate volume and pan > control. In any event, I've got 3 RC5532s in my parts collection. > I'll still have to use TL082s or some other opamp for the rest. > > Thanks! > -phaeton While you're building effects might I point you to a very neat little compressor: http://machines.hyperreal.org/categorie ... compressorWorks great and definitely goes along with the KISS mindset =] - -- Brendan Gillatt brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk http://www.brendangillatt.co.ukPGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op= ... 0xBACD7433-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) iD4DBQFHbpdXkA9dCbrNdDMRAkpIAJwKZrQLg0sLb/6YJadn4VYtnRzK8gCYncOV plI3lJpZtl4e8h7D7uRYyg== =reO3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
phaeton
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
> > While you're building effects might I point you to a very neat little > compressor:http://machines.hyperreal.org/categories/DIY/info/compressor > > Works great and definitely goes along with the KISS mindset =] > Excellent circuit! Looks like it will be a lot of fun. Say, btw... is there anything else I should be using to search for 100K stereo pots w/ audio taper? I'm completely striking out at the following places: http://www.jameco.comhttp://www.mouser.comhttp://www.digikey.comwith permutations of "stereo potentiometer" and "dual ganged pot" and "stereo volume pot" and such. Even rifling through the hits of "potentiometer" doesn't seem to show them. Radioshack has it, but they're a last resort. I could swear I bought one online once before, and I would expect these to be a fairly standard item. Did someone cut down the last stereo pot tree?
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
Michael
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
phaeton wrote: > > > > > While you're building effects might I point you to a very neat little > > compressor:http://machines.hyperreal.org/categories/DIY/info/compressor > > > > Works great and definitely goes along with the KISS mindset =] > > > > Excellent circuit! Looks like it will be a lot of fun. > > Say, btw... is there anything else I should be using to search for > 100K stereo pots w/ audio taper? I'm completely striking out at the > following places: > > http://www.jameco.com> http://www.mouser.comhttp://www.mouser.com/catalog/632/574.PDFhttp://www.mouser.com/catalog/632/575.PDFhttp://www.mouser.com/catalog/632/576.PDFhttp://www.mouser.com/catalog/632/578.PDF> http://www.digikey.com> > with permutations of "stereo potentiometer" and "dual ganged pot" and > "stereo volume pot" and such. Even rifling through the hits of > "potentiometer" doesn't seem to show them. Radioshack has it, but > they're a last resort. > > I could swear I bought one online once before, and I would expect > these to be a fairly standard item. Did someone cut down the last > stereo pot tree? -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
Eeyore
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
phaeton wrote:
> > > > If you are going to build a CMOY don't don't don't use a 9v battery - the > > life through a pair of 64ohm 'phones is, perhaps, 3 hours! Use some good > > NiMH AAAs or consider looking at lithium polymer batteries. > > > > A 3 hour practice session on the guitar or bass probably should be > followed by a break anyways. > > That said.....Oh how i pine for the days when we will have small, > safe, and adjustable nuclear power cells that will put out a constant > amount of power and last forever. That may be lofty, but i sure hope > that some huge revolution in battery technology is within the decade. > > For this device, I was probably going to use rechargeables. Or just > plug it in and deal with the lack of mobility. I even mused taking > apart an old sony Discman, identifying the necessary circuit bits, and > kitbashing my circuit and the Discman all into the same housing with a > single power supply, but I guess I'm not that ambitious. > > The Burr-Brown chips are significantly overspec'd for my application, > at least as far as the THD figures are. Especially since I'm kinda > sorta planning a distortion circuit for the instrument input anyways. > Ideally, it would have that and some sort of mid-hump tone control, > but the more I think about it, the more features I want to add, and I > tend to overcomplicate everything I do. I've been trying to practice > the K.I.S.S. philosophy. Just go back to the original plan of 3 > simple audio channels each with their own separate volume and pan > control. In any event, I've got 3 RC5532s in my parts collection. > I'll still have to use TL082s or some other opamp for the rest.
TL082s will be good for the high input impedance input stage you should have to avoid destroying the 'tone' of your guitar. Mind you it's less of an issue with bass guitars.
Graham
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
phaeton
|
 Re: Better than LM386 on batteries?
> -- > Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to > prove it. > Member of DAV #85. > > Michael A. Terrell > Central Florida
Thanks for the links. Mouser's website search feature is pants, but I forgot that the PDF catalogue is the way to go.
Btw, in that FidoCAD example, (I could provide a jpg if necessary), I can hook up the top opamp like a normal inverting or non-inverting gain stage, right?
Thx
-Phaeton
|
| 30 Dec 2007, 15:35 |
|
 |
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 20 posts ] |
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|