Op amp advice

[Matt Macchiarolo]

For you op-amp experts I need some advice...

Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
white noise). The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.

What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think would
be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
answer but not finding anything concrete.

Thanks in advace,

Matt

--
---
Matt Macchiarolo
mlmacchiarolo at comcast dot net
AIM screen name RTI1182

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." -Edward R. Murrow

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>
> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise).

That's total rubbish.

I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
encapsualation defect.

> The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.

The suffixes relate to commercial / industrial / military temperature range and
the package ( dual in line / SMT etc ).

TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments who
originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes vary
from manufacturer to manufacturer.


> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think would
> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
> answer but not finding anything concrete.

Well you need the commercial type in the same package as you want to replace.

I don't expect you're going to go anywhere with this though. Old products
didn't have today's noise specs and it isn't just the op-amps. 'Thermal noise'
from resistors can't be 'replaced out' for example. Older designs paid less
attention to thermal noise issues.

Peavey also weren't exactly known as great mixing console makers, so don't
expect too much anyway.

The 5532 is actually quite quiet and is still in very regular use. TL072s are
somewhat noisier by todays's standards but still have their applications.

Random replacement really isn't going to buy you much. You'd have to find the
noisiest areas and substitute better parts to be honest ( assuming that it
would make a difference over the thermal noise ).


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>
> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise).

That's total rubbish.

I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
encapsualation defect.

> The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.

The suffixes relate to commercial / industrial / military temperature range and
the package ( dual in line / SMT etc ).

TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments who
originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes vary
from manufacturer to manufacturer.


> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think would
> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
> answer but not finding anything concrete.

Well you need the commercial type in the same package as you want to replace.

I don't expect you're going to go anywhere with this though. Old products
didn't have today's noise specs and it isn't just the op-amps. 'Thermal noise'
from resistors can't be 'replaced out' for example. Older designs paid less
attention to thermal noise issues.

Peavey also weren't exactly known as great mixing console makers, so don't
expect too much anyway.

The 5532 is actually quite quiet and is still in very regular use. TL072s are
somewhat noisier by todays's standards but still have their applications.

Random replacement really isn't going to buy you much. You'd have to find the
noisiest areas and substitute better parts to be honest ( assuming that it
would make a difference over the thermal noise ).


Graham

[Mike T.]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:45:26 +0000, Pooh Bear
> wrote:

>Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
>> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>>
>> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
>> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
>> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
>> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
>> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
>> white noise).
>
>That's total rubbish.
>
>I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
>encapsualation defect.
>
>> The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
>> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
>> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
>> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
>> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.
>
>The suffixes relate to commercial / industrial / military temperature range and
>the package ( dual in line / SMT etc ).
>
>TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments who
>originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes vary
>from manufacturer to manufacturer.
>
>
>> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think would
>> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
>> answer but not finding anything concrete.
>
>Well you need the commercial type in the same package as you want to replace.
>
>I don't expect you're going to go anywhere with this though. Old products
>didn't have today's noise specs and it isn't just the op-amps. 'Thermal noise'
>from resistors can't be 'replaced out' for example. Older designs paid less
>attention to thermal noise issues.
>
>Peavey also weren't exactly known as great mixing console makers, so don't
>expect too much anyway.
>
>The 5532 is actually quite quiet and is still in very regular use. TL072s are
>somewhat noisier by todays's standards but still have their applications.
>
>Random replacement really isn't going to buy you much. You'd have to find the
>noisiest areas and substitute better parts to be honest ( assuming that it
>would make a difference over the thermal noise ).
>
>
>Graham
>
Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
educated guesses:

The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.

The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.

Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
so I won't even venture a guess.

Mike T.

[Mike T.]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:45:26 +0000, Pooh Bear
> wrote:

>Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
>> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>>
>> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
>> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
>> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
>> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
>> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
>> white noise).
>
>That's total rubbish.
>
>I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
>encapsualation defect.
>
>> The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
>> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
>> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
>> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
>> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.
>
>The suffixes relate to commercial / industrial / military temperature range and
>the package ( dual in line / SMT etc ).
>
>TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments who
>originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes vary
>from manufacturer to manufacturer.
>
>
>> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think would
>> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
>> answer but not finding anything concrete.
>
>Well you need the commercial type in the same package as you want to replace.
>
>I don't expect you're going to go anywhere with this though. Old products
>didn't have today's noise specs and it isn't just the op-amps. 'Thermal noise'
>from resistors can't be 'replaced out' for example. Older designs paid less
>attention to thermal noise issues.
>
>Peavey also weren't exactly known as great mixing console makers, so don't
>expect too much anyway.
>
>The 5532 is actually quite quiet and is still in very regular use. TL072s are
>somewhat noisier by todays's standards but still have their applications.
>
>Random replacement really isn't going to buy you much. You'd have to find the
>noisiest areas and substitute better parts to be honest ( assuming that it
>would make a difference over the thermal noise ).
>
>
>Graham
>
Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
educated guesses:

The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.

The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.

Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
so I won't even venture a guess.

Mike T.

[William Sommerwerck]

> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400,
> and there is a noticeable level of noise in the master
> module when I pull up the faders, even though there is
> no signal from any of the channels.

Where are the channel faders? Are they all the way up/down, or at "normal"
operating positions?

Almost any electronics will produce audible noise under the "wrong" conditions.
Is everything (including your monitor amps) set up as it would be when making a
recording?

[William Sommerwerck]

> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400,
> and there is a noticeable level of noise in the master
> module when I pull up the faders, even though there is
> no signal from any of the channels.

Where are the channel faders? Are they all the way up/down, or at "normal"
operating positions?

Almost any electronics will produce audible noise under the "wrong" conditions.
Is everything (including your monitor amps) set up as it would be when making a
recording?

[Eric K. Weber]

Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
supply.

Rgds:
Eric

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...
> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>
> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise). The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few
TL
> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.
>
> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think
would
> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
> answer but not finding anything concrete.
>
> Thanks in advace,
>
> Matt
>
> --
> ---
> Matt Macchiarolo
> mlmacchiarolo at comcast dot net
> AIM screen name RTI1182
>
> "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." -Edward R. Murrow
>
>
>

[Eric K. Weber]

Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
supply.

Rgds:
Eric

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...
> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>
> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise). The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few
TL
> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.
>
> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think
would
> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
> answer but not finding anything concrete.
>
> Thanks in advace,
>
> Matt
>
> --
> ---
> Matt Macchiarolo
> mlmacchiarolo at comcast dot net
> AIM screen name RTI1182
>
> "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." -Edward R. Murrow
>
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

"Mike T." wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:45:26 +0000, Pooh Bear
> > wrote:
>
> >Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> >> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
> >>
> >> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> >> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> >> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> >> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> >> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> >> white noise).
> >
> >That's total rubbish.
> >
> >I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
> >encapsualation defect.
> >
> >> The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
> >> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> >> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> >> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> >> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.
> >
> >The suffixes relate to commercial / industrial / military temperature range and
> >the package ( dual in line / SMT etc ).
> >
> >TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments who
> >originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes vary
> >from manufacturer to manufacturer.
> >
> >
> >> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think would
> >> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
> >> answer but not finding anything concrete.
> >
> >Well you need the commercial type in the same package as you want to replace.
> >
> >I don't expect you're going to go anywhere with this though. Old products
> >didn't have today's noise specs and it isn't just the op-amps. 'Thermal noise'
> >from resistors can't be 'replaced out' for example. Older designs paid less
> >attention to thermal noise issues.
> >
> >Peavey also weren't exactly known as great mixing console makers, so don't
> >expect too much anyway.
> >
> >The 5532 is actually quite quiet and is still in very regular use. TL072s are
> >somewhat noisier by todays's standards but still have their applications.
> >
> >Random replacement really isn't going to buy you much. You'd have to find the
> >noisiest areas and substitute better parts to be honest ( assuming that it
> >would make a difference over the thermal noise ).
> >
> >
> >Graham
>
> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> educated guesses:
>
> The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.

Pretty likely !


> The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.

EEEK !!! I hope no mic stage goes straight into a TL07x. You *should* find some
transistors there. I'm pretty certain it won't be a transformer input mic stage btw
( cost reasons ).


> Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> so I won't even venture a guess.

I was trying to think of one. There's nothing in the 'commodity' ( i.e. affordable !
) IC market that I can think of immediately that is also bi-fet but I have a
nagging feeling somewhere there's something with a *slightly* lower noise figure.
Don't use bi-fets much these days,!

The more esoteric devices from Burr-Brown ( now TI ) and Analog Devices will have
lower noise figures for sure.

Thing is - there's no guarantee that there'll be a useful improvement until you
diagnose the root cause of the noise sources. You could end up spending more bucks
than a new Behringer costs.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

"Mike T." wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:45:26 +0000, Pooh Bear
> > wrote:
>
> >Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> >> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
> >>
> >> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> >> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> >> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> >> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> >> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> >> white noise).
> >
> >That's total rubbish.
> >
> >I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
> >encapsualation defect.
> >
> >> The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
> >> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> >> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> >> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> >> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.
> >
> >The suffixes relate to commercial / industrial / military temperature range and
> >the package ( dual in line / SMT etc ).
> >
> >TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments who
> >originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes vary
> >from manufacturer to manufacturer.
> >
> >
> >> What would the difference be for each version, and which do you think would
> >> be best for my application Or would it really matter? Tried Google for the
> >> answer but not finding anything concrete.
> >
> >Well you need the commercial type in the same package as you want to replace.
> >
> >I don't expect you're going to go anywhere with this though. Old products
> >didn't have today's noise specs and it isn't just the op-amps. 'Thermal noise'
> >from resistors can't be 'replaced out' for example. Older designs paid less
> >attention to thermal noise issues.
> >
> >Peavey also weren't exactly known as great mixing console makers, so don't
> >expect too much anyway.
> >
> >The 5532 is actually quite quiet and is still in very regular use. TL072s are
> >somewhat noisier by todays's standards but still have their applications.
> >
> >Random replacement really isn't going to buy you much. You'd have to find the
> >noisiest areas and substitute better parts to be honest ( assuming that it
> >would make a difference over the thermal noise ).
> >
> >
> >Graham
>
> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> educated guesses:
>
> The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.

Pretty likely !


> The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.

EEEK !!! I hope no mic stage goes straight into a TL07x. You *should* find some
transistors there. I'm pretty certain it won't be a transformer input mic stage btw
( cost reasons ).


> Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> so I won't even venture a guess.

I was trying to think of one. There's nothing in the 'commodity' ( i.e. affordable !
) IC market that I can think of immediately that is also bi-fet but I have a
nagging feeling somewhere there's something with a *slightly* lower noise figure.
Don't use bi-fets much these days,!

The more esoteric devices from Burr-Brown ( now TI ) and Analog Devices will have
lower noise figures for sure.

Thing is - there's no guarantee that there'll be a useful improvement until you
diagnose the root cause of the noise sources. You could end up spending more bucks
than a new Behringer costs.


Graham

[William Sommerwerck]

> According to the previous owner, the master module was affected
> with a power surge at one time that blew out the fuse resistors in
> the power input circuit to the module... could this have affected
> the op amps as well?

I don't know, but such a failure calls for some careful troubleshooting (such as
using an AC voltmeter to see if one stage is particularly noisy).

Assuming the master module uses inexpensive tab-case regulators, it wouldn't
hurt to replace them. Whether a wholesale replacement of other components is
justified, I don't know.

[William Sommerwerck]

> According to the previous owner, the master module was affected
> with a power surge at one time that blew out the fuse resistors in
> the power input circuit to the module... could this have affected
> the op amps as well?

I don't know, but such a failure calls for some careful troubleshooting (such as
using an AC voltmeter to see if one stage is particularly noisy).

Assuming the master module uses inexpensive tab-case regulators, it wouldn't
hurt to replace them. Whether a wholesale replacement of other components is
justified, I don't know.

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Thanks for all the advice, folks.

Channel faders are all down. I am still in the process of connecting the
console to the rest of the studio, but I did get a mix through it, and
that's when I noticed the noise.

The noise seems to be only coming from the master module, the input channels
are actually pretty quiet. According to the previous owner, the master
module was affected with a power surge at one time that blew out the fuse
resistors in the power input circuit to the module...could this have
affected the op amps as well?

"William Sommerwerck" > wrote in message
...
> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400,
> > and there is a noticeable level of noise in the master
> > module when I pull up the faders, even though there is
> > no signal from any of the channels.
>
> Where are the channel faders? Are they all the way up/down, or at "normal"
> operating positions?
>
> Almost any electronics will produce audible noise under the "wrong"
conditions.
> Is everything (including your monitor amps) set up as it would be when
making a
> recording?
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Thanks for all the advice, folks.

Channel faders are all down. I am still in the process of connecting the
console to the rest of the studio, but I did get a mix through it, and
that's when I noticed the noise.

The noise seems to be only coming from the master module, the input channels
are actually pretty quiet. According to the previous owner, the master
module was affected with a power surge at one time that blew out the fuse
resistors in the power input circuit to the module...could this have
affected the op amps as well?

"William Sommerwerck" > wrote in message
...
> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400,
> > and there is a noticeable level of noise in the master
> > module when I pull up the faders, even though there is
> > no signal from any of the channels.
>
> Where are the channel faders? Are they all the way up/down, or at "normal"
> operating positions?
>
> Almost any electronics will produce audible noise under the "wrong"
conditions.
> Is everything (including your monitor amps) set up as it would be when
making a
> recording?
>

[Scott Dorsey]

Eric K. Weber > wrote:
>Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
>temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
>although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
>wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
>millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
>should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
>supply.

TI never could make decent op-amps. While it does seem very unlikely,
I could see op-amps getting noisy as they age if they have package
contamination problems... and if anyone has package contamination issues,
it would be TI. They had to buy out Burr-Brown because they couldn't make
decent linear stuff in-house.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Eric K. Weber > wrote:
>Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
>temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
>although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
>wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
>millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
>should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
>supply.

TI never could make decent op-amps. While it does seem very unlikely,
I could see op-amps getting noisy as they age if they have package
contamination problems... and if anyone has package contamination issues,
it would be TI. They had to buy out Burr-Brown because they couldn't make
decent linear stuff in-house.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul Stamler]

"Mike T." > wrote in message
...

>> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> educated guesses:
>
> The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.
>
> The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.
>
> Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> so I won't even venture a guess.

I don't know the schematic of this mixer either, but I'd guess that the
TL072 isn't the first opamp in the chain; that's probably a 5532.

But I'm not clear on one thing: you heard the noise just pushing up the
master faders, or pushing up the master *and* the channel faders? If the
latter, what was plugged into the inputs?

If the answer is, "Nothing", then try this experiment. Push up the master
and one channel fader. Listen to and/or measure the noise. Now pull down the
channel fader and plug a dummy XLR plug into the microphone input, with a
150-ohm metal film resistor soldered between pins 2 and 3. Push the fader
back up. If the noise is a lot less, stop worrying. You were hearing the
sound of an open-circuit input, which will almost always be worse than one
with something plugged in. And since you won't be opening a fader on a
channel with nothing plugged into it, you can relax.

Peace,
Paul

[Paul Stamler]

"Mike T." > wrote in message
...

>> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> educated guesses:
>
> The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.
>
> The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.
>
> Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> so I won't even venture a guess.

I don't know the schematic of this mixer either, but I'd guess that the
TL072 isn't the first opamp in the chain; that's probably a 5532.

But I'm not clear on one thing: you heard the noise just pushing up the
master faders, or pushing up the master *and* the channel faders? If the
latter, what was plugged into the inputs?

If the answer is, "Nothing", then try this experiment. Push up the master
and one channel fader. Listen to and/or measure the noise. Now pull down the
channel fader and plug a dummy XLR plug into the microphone input, with a
150-ohm metal film resistor soldered between pins 2 and 3. Push the fader
back up. If the noise is a lot less, stop worrying. You were hearing the
sound of an open-circuit input, which will almost always be worse than one
with something plugged in. And since you won't be opening a fader on a
channel with nothing plugged into it, you can relax.

Peace,
Paul

[Pooh Bear]

Paul Stamler wrote:

> "Mike T." > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> > educated guesses:
> >
> > The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.
> >
> > The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> > signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> > consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.
> >
> > Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> > this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> > so I won't even venture a guess.
>
> I don't know the schematic of this mixer either, but I'd guess that the
> TL072 isn't the first opamp in the chain; that's probably a 5532.
>
> But I'm not clear on one thing: you heard the noise just pushing up the
> master faders, or pushing up the master *and* the channel faders? If the
> latter, what was plugged into the inputs?
>
> If the answer is, "Nothing", then try this experiment. Push up the master
> and one channel fader. Listen to and/or measure the noise. Now pull down the
> channel fader and plug a dummy XLR plug into the microphone input, with a
> 150-ohm metal film resistor soldered between pins 2 and 3. Push the fader
> back up. If the noise is a lot less, stop worrying. You were hearing the
> sound of an open-circuit input, which will almost always be worse than one
> with something plugged in. And since you won't be opening a fader on a
> channel with nothing plugged into it, you can relax.

Good point.

I'm aware that many 'music / guitar shops' make exactly this kind of mistake
when demoing mixers.

They say " you're mixer's noisy ". Actually of course - it's the absence of the
150-200 ohm source resistance that makes the circuit noisy as we know. But
*they* don't get it.

Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Paul Stamler wrote:

> "Mike T." > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> > educated guesses:
> >
> > The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.
> >
> > The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> > signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> > consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.
> >
> > Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> > this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> > so I won't even venture a guess.
>
> I don't know the schematic of this mixer either, but I'd guess that the
> TL072 isn't the first opamp in the chain; that's probably a 5532.
>
> But I'm not clear on one thing: you heard the noise just pushing up the
> master faders, or pushing up the master *and* the channel faders? If the
> latter, what was plugged into the inputs?
>
> If the answer is, "Nothing", then try this experiment. Push up the master
> and one channel fader. Listen to and/or measure the noise. Now pull down the
> channel fader and plug a dummy XLR plug into the microphone input, with a
> 150-ohm metal film resistor soldered between pins 2 and 3. Push the fader
> back up. If the noise is a lot less, stop worrying. You were hearing the
> sound of an open-circuit input, which will almost always be worse than one
> with something plugged in. And since you won't be opening a fader on a
> channel with nothing plugged into it, you can relax.

Good point.

I'm aware that many 'music / guitar shops' make exactly this kind of mistake
when demoing mixers.

They say " you're mixer's noisy ". Actually of course - it's the absence of the
150-200 ohm source resistance that makes the circuit noisy as we know. But
*they* don't get it.

Graham

[Pooh Bear]

"Eric K. Weber" wrote:

> Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
> temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
> although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
> wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
> millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
> should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
> supply.

I target around 300uV on +/-17V. ;-)

It doesn't need to be that good though. Op-amps have excellent power supply
rejection normally.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

"Eric K. Weber" wrote:

> Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
> temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
> although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
> wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
> millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
> should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
> supply.

I target around 300uV on +/-17V. ;-)

It doesn't need to be that good though. Op-amps have excellent power supply
rejection normally.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Eric K. Weber > wrote:
> >Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
> >temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
> >although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
> >wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
> >millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
> >should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
> >supply.
>
> TI never could make decent op-amps. While it does seem very unlikely,
> I could see op-amps getting noisy as they age if they have package
> contamination problems... and if anyone has package contamination issues,
> it would be TI. They had to buy out Burr-Brown because they couldn't make
> decent linear stuff in-house.

A certain person I know reputedly bought a batch of 'cheap' TL071/2s that
allegedly may have been immersed in salt water ( salvaged cargo ).

They went noisy it seems !


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Eric K. Weber > wrote:
> >Have a look at www.ti.com , they may be different package styles or
> >temperature ranges. Op amps getting noisy with age seems unlikely....
> >although there might be lower noise units that are pin compatible. You may
> >wish to check the power supply noise level.... With your meter on AC
> >millivolts measure the ripple on your DC power supply.... less than 10 MV
> >should be expected... good supply run about 2 MV for a 24VDC or lower
> >supply.
>
> TI never could make decent op-amps. While it does seem very unlikely,
> I could see op-amps getting noisy as they age if they have package
> contamination problems... and if anyone has package contamination issues,
> it would be TI. They had to buy out Burr-Brown because they couldn't make
> decent linear stuff in-house.

A certain person I know reputedly bought a batch of 'cheap' TL071/2s that
allegedly may have been immersed in salt water ( salvaged cargo ).

They went noisy it seems !


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
> Paul Stamler wrote:
>
> > "Mike T." > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > >> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> > > educated guesses:
> > >
> > > The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.
> > >
> > > The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> > > signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> > > consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.
> > >
> > > Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> > > this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> > > so I won't even venture a guess.
> >
> > I don't know the schematic of this mixer either, but I'd guess that the
> > TL072 isn't the first opamp in the chain; that's probably a 5532.
> >
> > But I'm not clear on one thing: you heard the noise just pushing up the
> > master faders, or pushing up the master *and* the channel faders? If the
> > latter, what was plugged into the inputs?
> >
> > If the answer is, "Nothing", then try this experiment. Push up the
master
> > and one channel fader. Listen to and/or measure the noise. Now pull down
the
> > channel fader and plug a dummy XLR plug into the microphone input, with
a
> > 150-ohm metal film resistor soldered between pins 2 and 3. Push the
fader
> > back up. If the noise is a lot less, stop worrying. You were hearing the
> > sound of an open-circuit input, which will almost always be worse than
one
> > with something plugged in. And since you won't be opening a fader on a
> > channel with nothing plugged into it, you can relax.
>
> Good point.
>
> I'm aware that many 'music / guitar shops' make exactly this kind of
mistake
> when demoing mixers.
>
> They say " you're mixer's noisy ". Actually of course - it's the absence
of the
> 150-200 ohm source resistance that makes the circuit noisy as we know. But
> *they* don't get it.
>
> Graham
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
> Paul Stamler wrote:
>
> > "Mike T." > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > >> Further to Grahams's excellent advice, I will make some slightly
> > > educated guesses:
> > >
> > > The noise was always there. Our expectations have gotten higher.
> > >
> > > The first op-amp in the channel, with the smallest (mic level) input
> > > signal, is the biggest contributor to the noise. If it's a TL072,
> > > consider replacing it with a newer, quieter design.
> > >
> > > Do any of our experts have a suggestion for a TL072 replacement in
> > > this application? I'm not familiar with the schematic of this mixer,
> > > so I won't even venture a guess.
> >
> > I don't know the schematic of this mixer either, but I'd guess that the
> > TL072 isn't the first opamp in the chain; that's probably a 5532.
> >
> > But I'm not clear on one thing: you heard the noise just pushing up the
> > master faders, or pushing up the master *and* the channel faders? If the
> > latter, what was plugged into the inputs?
> >
> > If the answer is, "Nothing", then try this experiment. Push up the
master
> > and one channel fader. Listen to and/or measure the noise. Now pull down
the
> > channel fader and plug a dummy XLR plug into the microphone input, with
a
> > 150-ohm metal film resistor soldered between pins 2 and 3. Push the
fader
> > back up. If the noise is a lot less, stop worrying. You were hearing the
> > sound of an open-circuit input, which will almost always be worse than
one
> > with something plugged in. And since you won't be opening a fader on a
> > channel with nothing plugged into it, you can relax.
>
> Good point.
>
> I'm aware that many 'music / guitar shops' make exactly this kind of
mistake
> when demoing mixers.
>
> They say " you're mixer's noisy ". Actually of course - it's the absence
of the
> 150-200 ohm source resistance that makes the circuit noisy as we know. But
> *they* don't get it.
>
> Graham
>

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Thanks for all the advice, folks.
>
> Channel faders are all down. I am still in the process of connecting the
> console to the rest of the studio, but I did get a mix through it, and
> that's when I noticed the noise.
>
> The noise seems to be only coming from the master module, the input channels
> are actually pretty quiet. According to the previous owner, the master
> module was affected with a power surge at one time that blew out the fuse
> resistors in the power input circuit to the module...could this have
> affected the op amps as well?

That's an unusual claim. The master module will share the power supply with all
the other channels.

A 'power surge' is also an unusual claim. Mixers normally use IC voltage
regulators that prevent any such problem from troubling the circuitry.

What 'fuse resistors' does he refer to ? There's often an RC 'decoupling'
network on the power input to a channel / module - does he mean them ? If the
resistors on just that module blew - then it's unlikely a 'power surge' was
involved. Maybe a *fault* !!! To be honest it sounds a bit like he's talking
out of his arse. He may however be misinterpreting something.

It *did* sound a little like your bus mix amps might be noisy from your general
description. You could selectively replace the probable 5532s on that part of
the circuitry, just to see, at low cost.

Noisy bus amp = noisy mixer even when channel faders are down.

What's the 741 doing btw ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Thanks for all the advice, folks.
>
> Channel faders are all down. I am still in the process of connecting the
> console to the rest of the studio, but I did get a mix through it, and
> that's when I noticed the noise.
>
> The noise seems to be only coming from the master module, the input channels
> are actually pretty quiet. According to the previous owner, the master
> module was affected with a power surge at one time that blew out the fuse
> resistors in the power input circuit to the module...could this have
> affected the op amps as well?

That's an unusual claim. The master module will share the power supply with all
the other channels.

A 'power surge' is also an unusual claim. Mixers normally use IC voltage
regulators that prevent any such problem from troubling the circuitry.

What 'fuse resistors' does he refer to ? There's often an RC 'decoupling'
network on the power input to a channel / module - does he mean them ? If the
resistors on just that module blew - then it's unlikely a 'power surge' was
involved. Maybe a *fault* !!! To be honest it sounds a bit like he's talking
out of his arse. He may however be misinterpreting something.

It *did* sound a little like your bus mix amps might be noisy from your general
description. You could selectively replace the probable 5532s on that part of
the circuitry, just to see, at low cost.

Noisy bus amp = noisy mixer even when channel faders are down.

What's the 741 doing btw ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.

Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.

Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following them
though that could also be influencing things.

If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then selective
replacement as a test would make sense.

I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the Peavey guys
know something they're not letting on about ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.

Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.

Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following them
though that could also be influencing things.

If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then selective
replacement as a test would make sense.

I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the Peavey guys
know something they're not letting on about ?


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...

>
> What's the 741 doing btw ?
>

Don't have the slightest idea, reading schematics is like Greek to me.
Though it's there and there is only one. Perhaps something to do with the
mono switch?

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...

>
> What's the 741 doing btw ?
>

Don't have the slightest idea, reading schematics is like Greek to me.
Though it's there and there is only one. Perhaps something to do with the
mono switch?

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Thanks Pooh,

Tracing it down through signal path diagram, the path for either L or R
goes Bus, Summing Amp, Master Trim, another op amp, Bus Send/Return, fader,
master output...breaking the normalled connection in the insert kills the
noise, so I'm guessing it's either the summing amp or the other one in that
chain, both of which are around 5532's. Am I making any sense?

Got a fax number? I can fax you the schematics...

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.
>
> Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.
>
> Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following
them
> though that could also be influencing things.
>
> If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then selective
> replacement as a test would make sense.
>
> I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the
Peavey guys
> know something they're not letting on about ?
>
>
> Graham
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Thanks Pooh,

Tracing it down through signal path diagram, the path for either L or R
goes Bus, Summing Amp, Master Trim, another op amp, Bus Send/Return, fader,
master output...breaking the normalled connection in the insert kills the
noise, so I'm guessing it's either the summing amp or the other one in that
chain, both of which are around 5532's. Am I making any sense?

Got a fax number? I can fax you the schematics...

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.
>
> Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.
>
> Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following
them
> though that could also be influencing things.
>
> If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then selective
> replacement as a test would make sense.
>
> I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the
Peavey guys
> know something they're not letting on about ?
>
>
> Graham
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Oops, there should be another amp between the return and the fader, and then
two parallel amps (to balance the output, I imagine) between the fader and
the output

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks Pooh,
>
> Tracing it down through signal path diagram, the path for either L or R
> goes Bus, Summing Amp, Master Trim, another op amp, Bus Send/Return,
fader,
> master output...breaking the normalled connection in the insert kills the
> noise, so I'm guessing it's either the summing amp or the other one in
that
> chain, both of which are around 5532's. Am I making any sense?
>
> Got a fax number? I can fax you the schematics...
>
> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.
> >
> > Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.
> >
> > Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following
> them
> > though that could also be influencing things.
> >
> > If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then
selective
> > replacement as a test would make sense.
> >
> > I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the
> Peavey guys
> > know something they're not letting on about ?
> >
> >
> > Graham
> >
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Oops, there should be another amp between the return and the fader, and then
two parallel amps (to balance the output, I imagine) between the fader and
the output

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks Pooh,
>
> Tracing it down through signal path diagram, the path for either L or R
> goes Bus, Summing Amp, Master Trim, another op amp, Bus Send/Return,
fader,
> master output...breaking the normalled connection in the insert kills the
> noise, so I'm guessing it's either the summing amp or the other one in
that
> chain, both of which are around 5532's. Am I making any sense?
>
> Got a fax number? I can fax you the schematics...
>
> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.
> >
> > Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.
> >
> > Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following
> them
> > though that could also be influencing things.
> >
> > If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then
selective
> > replacement as a test would make sense.
> >
> > I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the
> Peavey guys
> > know something they're not letting on about ?
> >
> >
> > Graham
> >
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > >
> > > What's the 741 doing btw ?
> > >
> >
> > Don't have the slightest idea, reading schematics is like Greek to me.
> > Though it's there and there is only one. Perhaps something to do with
the
> > mono switch?
>
> If you have the schematics - can you scan them ( master section a tleast )
> and post in alt.binaries.schematics.electronics ?
>
> I'll take a look. Would be able to advise better.
>
>
> Graham
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > >
> > > What's the 741 doing btw ?
> > >
> >
> > Don't have the slightest idea, reading schematics is like Greek to me.
> > Though it's there and there is only one. Perhaps something to do with
the
> > mono switch?
>
> If you have the schematics - can you scan them ( master section a tleast )
> and post in alt.binaries.schematics.electronics ?
>
> I'll take a look. Would be able to advise better.
>
>
> Graham
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >
> > What's the 741 doing btw ?
> >
>
> Don't have the slightest idea, reading schematics is like Greek to me.
> Though it's there and there is only one. Perhaps something to do with the
> mono switch?

If you have the schematics - can you scan them ( master section a tleast )
and post in alt.binaries.schematics.electronics ?

I'll take a look. Would be able to advise better.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >
> > What's the 741 doing btw ?
> >
>
> Don't have the slightest idea, reading schematics is like Greek to me.
> Though it's there and there is only one. Perhaps something to do with the
> mono switch?

If you have the schematics - can you scan them ( master section a tleast )
and post in alt.binaries.schematics.electronics ?

I'll take a look. Would be able to advise better.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?

Yup.

My bad to post it here but here goes ( dial international access ) ( then UK
code - 44 ) followed by 1727 then 765452.

Plain paper fax btw. Only understands A4 ( international ) paper size - not some
of the funny US sizes. Try one page first to see how it goes.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?

Yup.

My bad to post it here but here goes ( dial international access ) ( then UK
code - 44 ) followed by 1727 then 765452.

Plain paper fax btw. Only understands A4 ( international ) paper size - not some
of the funny US sizes. Try one page first to see how it goes.


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
>
> Yup.
>

Fax is transmitting. I won't give out your fax number. :-)

741 is in section A-4 of the lower schematic (Left Bus).

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
>
> Yup.
>

Fax is transmitting. I won't give out your fax number. :-)

741 is in section A-4 of the lower schematic (Left Bus).

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise).

Yeah, Peavey's advice sounds like white noise, or just plain horse
manure. I've never heard of op amps that "age" and "lose their
tolerance." More likely it's a bad resistor, a bad capacitor, a bad
switch, or a bad solder joint. Could even be a dirty connector
contact. While there may be better sounding op amps available today,
take care of the real source of the noise first or you'll still have
it after you replace the chips.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise).

Yeah, Peavey's advice sounds like white noise, or just plain horse
manure. I've never heard of op amps that "age" and "lose their
tolerance." More likely it's a bad resistor, a bad capacitor, a bad
switch, or a bad solder joint. Could even be a dirty connector
contact. While there may be better sounding op amps available today,
take care of the real source of the noise first or you'll still have
it after you replace the chips.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Matt Macchiarolo]

So I am learning.

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
news:znr1100362543k@trad...
>
> In article >
writes:
>
> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> > noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the
faders,
> > even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called
Peavey's
> > tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
as
> > they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> > white noise).
>
> Yeah, Peavey's advice sounds like white noise, or just plain horse
> manure. I've never heard of op amps that "age" and "lose their
> tolerance." More likely it's a bad resistor, a bad capacitor, a bad
> switch, or a bad solder joint. Could even be a dirty connector
> contact. While there may be better sounding op amps available today,
> take care of the real source of the noise first or you'll still have
> it after you replace the chips.
>
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers )
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Matt Macchiarolo]

So I am learning.

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
news:znr1100362543k@trad...
>
> In article >
writes:
>
> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> > noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the
faders,
> > even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called
Peavey's
> > tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
as
> > they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> > white noise).
>
> Yeah, Peavey's advice sounds like white noise, or just plain horse
> manure. I've never heard of op amps that "age" and "lose their
> tolerance." More likely it's a bad resistor, a bad capacitor, a bad
> switch, or a bad solder joint. Could even be a dirty connector
> contact. While there may be better sounding op amps available today,
> take care of the real source of the noise first or you'll still have
> it after you replace the chips.
>
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers )
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
> >
> > Yup.
>
> Fax is transmitting. I won't give out your fax number. :-)
>
> 741 is in section A-4 of the lower schematic (Left Bus).

Ok - got it.

Is that the size you got it ? A bit on the tiny side. Having trouble
reading it.

The good news is that the 741 clearly isn't in the audio path ( as I
suspected ).

I'm having trouble reading the U numbers but the ICs for the bus amps are
the ones ( one on each page ) that are on the top left hand corner - note
the connections to BUS GND and a 10UH inductor. Looks like one half of
the dual op-amp is the bus amp - the other half is the fader buffer -
pretty classic.

If *anything* is going to make a difference - it's them !

The resistor values around the bus amps aren't *too* bad regarding
thermal noise but I would use lower. But that's a re-design.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
> >
> > Yup.
>
> Fax is transmitting. I won't give out your fax number. :-)
>
> 741 is in section A-4 of the lower schematic (Left Bus).

Ok - got it.

Is that the size you got it ? A bit on the tiny side. Having trouble
reading it.

The good news is that the 741 clearly isn't in the audio path ( as I
suspected ).

I'm having trouble reading the U numbers but the ICs for the bus amps are
the ones ( one on each page ) that are on the top left hand corner - note
the connections to BUS GND and a 10UH inductor. Looks like one half of
the dual op-amp is the bus amp - the other half is the fader buffer -
pretty classic.

If *anything* is going to make a difference - it's them !

The resistor values around the bus amps aren't *too* bad regarding
thermal noise but I would use lower. But that's a re-design.


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Thanks Pooh! Next time I'm in the UK I will buy you a pint of Greene King!
Until then I will raise a glass of Old Speckled Hen to you!

Both schematics are on one page, 8.5x11...fairly tiny.

Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing amps,
correct? You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those pretty
easily.

If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?

And what does that 741 do?
"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
> > >
> > > Yup.
> >
> > Fax is transmitting. I won't give out your fax number. :-)
> >
> > 741 is in section A-4 of the lower schematic (Left Bus).
>
> Ok - got it.
>
> Is that the size you got it ? A bit on the tiny side. Having trouble
> reading it.
>
> The good news is that the 741 clearly isn't in the audio path ( as I
> suspected ).
>
> I'm having trouble reading the U numbers but the ICs for the bus amps are
> the ones ( one on each page ) that are on the top left hand corner - note
> the connections to BUS GND and a 10UH inductor. Looks like one half of
> the dual op-amp is the bus amp - the other half is the fader buffer -
> pretty classic.
>
> If *anything* is going to make a difference - it's them !
>
> The resistor values around the bus amps aren't *too* bad regarding
> thermal noise but I would use lower. But that's a re-design.
>
>
> Graham
>
>
>
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Thanks Pooh! Next time I'm in the UK I will buy you a pint of Greene King!
Until then I will raise a glass of Old Speckled Hen to you!

Both schematics are on one page, 8.5x11...fairly tiny.

Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing amps,
correct? You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those pretty
easily.

If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?

And what does that 741 do?
"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
> > >
> > > Yup.
> >
> > Fax is transmitting. I won't give out your fax number. :-)
> >
> > 741 is in section A-4 of the lower schematic (Left Bus).
>
> Ok - got it.
>
> Is that the size you got it ? A bit on the tiny side. Having trouble
> reading it.
>
> The good news is that the 741 clearly isn't in the audio path ( as I
> suspected ).
>
> I'm having trouble reading the U numbers but the ICs for the bus amps are
> the ones ( one on each page ) that are on the top left hand corner - note
> the connections to BUS GND and a 10UH inductor. Looks like one half of
> the dual op-amp is the bus amp - the other half is the fader buffer -
> pretty classic.
>
> If *anything* is going to make a difference - it's them !
>
> The resistor values around the bus amps aren't *too* bad regarding
> thermal noise but I would use lower. But that's a re-design.
>
>
> Graham
>
>
>
>
>

[Eric K. Weber]

Is this noise the same on both channels.... if so it's more likely either a
power supply issue or a design issue.

Rgds:
Eric

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.
>
> Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.
>
> Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following
them
> though that could also be influencing things.
>
> If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then selective
> replacement as a test would make sense.
>
> I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the
Peavey guys
> know something they're not letting on about ?
>
>
> Graham
>
>

[Eric K. Weber]

Is this noise the same on both channels.... if so it's more likely either a
power supply issue or a design issue.

Rgds:
Eric

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > It's just the master faders. No channel faders are up.
>
> Ok - sounds like noisy bus amps.
>
> Most likely a / some 5532s. There's going to be some circuitry following
them
> though that could also be influencing things.
>
> If you can identify the op-amp that's the bus mix section - then selective
> replacement as a test would make sense.
>
> I guess it's possible a chip's gone noisy - but it's rare. Maybe the
Peavey guys
> know something they're not letting on about ?
>
>
> Graham
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Thanks Pooh! Next time I'm in the UK I will buy you a pint of Greene King!
> Until then I will raise a glass of Old Speckled Hen to you!

Cheers then !


> Both schematics are on one page, 8.5x11...fairly tiny.
>
> Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing amps,
> correct?

Ok - wondered if that might be so.

> You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
> are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those pretty
> easily.

The other op-amps operate at high signal levels so the noise contribution there
won't be an issue.

No need to replace.

> If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?

Well, I'd most likely use something like 4k7 feedback Rs in place of 22k. You
can't do that without altering the channel values though or the gain structure
gets screwed.


> And what does that 741 do?

Given the quality of the fax it's tricky to say. Is there a peak led there
though. Maybe that's it ?

TI's part number for the DIL 5532 is NE5532AP btw.

http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/ne5532a.html - log in as a tech and
request samples !

Philips / Signetics have stopped making it. NJR / JRC ( New Japan Radio
Corporation ) also source it.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Thanks Pooh! Next time I'm in the UK I will buy you a pint of Greene King!
> Until then I will raise a glass of Old Speckled Hen to you!

Cheers then !


> Both schematics are on one page, 8.5x11...fairly tiny.
>
> Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing amps,
> correct?

Ok - wondered if that might be so.

> You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
> are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those pretty
> easily.

The other op-amps operate at high signal levels so the noise contribution there
won't be an issue.

No need to replace.

> If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?

Well, I'd most likely use something like 4k7 feedback Rs in place of 22k. You
can't do that without altering the channel values though or the gain structure
gets screwed.


> And what does that 741 do?

Given the quality of the fax it's tricky to say. Is there a peak led there
though. Maybe that's it ?

TI's part number for the DIL 5532 is NE5532AP btw.

http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/ne5532a.html - log in as a tech and
request samples !

Philips / Signetics have stopped making it. NJR / JRC ( New Japan Radio
Corporation ) also source it.


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> > Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing
amps,
> > correct?
>
> Ok - wondered if that might be so.

According to the signal path diagram, they correspond to the summing amps.
>
> > You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
> > are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those pretty
> > easily.
>
> The other op-amps operate at high signal levels so the noise contribution
there
> won't be an issue.
>
> No need to replace.
>
> > If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?
>
> Well, I'd most likely use something like 4k7 feedback Rs in place of 22k.
You
> can't do that without altering the channel values though or the gain
structure
> gets screwed.

Gotcha.
>
>
> > And what does that 741 do?
>
> Given the quality of the fax it's tricky to say. Is there a peak led there
> though. Maybe that's it ?
>
Ah yes, that makes sense to be the signal/peak LED circuit, it uses a
bicolor LED that is green with signal and red when within 3dB of clipping,
according to the manual...

When I get a chance I'll swap out those 5532's and we'll see what
happens...thanks for all your help!!

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> > Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing
amps,
> > correct?
>
> Ok - wondered if that might be so.

According to the signal path diagram, they correspond to the summing amps.
>
> > You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
> > are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those pretty
> > easily.
>
> The other op-amps operate at high signal levels so the noise contribution
there
> won't be an issue.
>
> No need to replace.
>
> > If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?
>
> Well, I'd most likely use something like 4k7 feedback Rs in place of 22k.
You
> can't do that without altering the channel values though or the gain
structure
> gets screwed.

Gotcha.
>
>
> > And what does that 741 do?
>
> Given the quality of the fax it's tricky to say. Is there a peak led there
> though. Maybe that's it ?
>
Ah yes, that makes sense to be the signal/peak LED circuit, it uses a
bicolor LED that is green with signal and red when within 3dB of clipping,
according to the manual...

When I get a chance I'll swap out those 5532's and we'll see what
happens...thanks for all your help!!

[Scott Dorsey]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
>
> The resistor values around the bus amps aren't *too* bad regarding
> thermal noise but I would use lower. But that's a re-design.

Might be a good idea to measure them and see that they are still the values
that the schematic says they should be. That's a possible noise source...
not so common with modern film resistors but it happens.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
>
> The resistor values around the bus amps aren't *too* bad regarding
> thermal noise but I would use lower. But that's a re-design.

Might be a good idea to measure them and see that they are still the values
that the schematic says they should be. That's a possible noise source...
not so common with modern film resistors but it happens.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Eric K. Weber]

It should scale to A4 with no problem.... and if he is calling from the
USA.. it's

011 44 1727 765452

011 international prefix...
44 UK country code....

Rgds:
Eric

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
>
> Yup.
>
> My bad to post it here but here goes ( dial international access ) ( then
UK
> code - 44 ) followed by 1727 then 765452.
>
> Plain paper fax btw. Only understands A4 ( international ) paper size -
not some
> of the funny US sizes. Try one page first to see how it goes.
>
>
> Graham
>
>

[Eric K. Weber]

It should scale to A4 with no problem.... and if he is calling from the
USA.. it's

011 44 1727 765452

011 international prefix...
44 UK country code....

Rgds:
Eric

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > I don't have a scanner, got a fax machine?
>
> Yup.
>
> My bad to post it here but here goes ( dial international access ) ( then
UK
> code - 44 ) followed by 1727 then 765452.
>
> Plain paper fax btw. Only understands A4 ( international ) paper size -
not some
> of the funny US sizes. Try one page first to see how it goes.
>
>
> Graham
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

"Eric K. Weber" wrote:

> It should scale to A4 with no problem.... and if he is calling from the
> USA.. it's

Ssssh ! It's a secret !

Yeah, it came through OK.

Had some past trouble with the 'legal' size paper though.

Pretty much all paper sizes here ( and rest of world ) are now international
standards. Just the USA goes its own way with the stuff you enherited from us
Brits mainly I think - lol.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

"Eric K. Weber" wrote:

> It should scale to A4 with no problem.... and if he is calling from the
> USA.. it's

Ssssh ! It's a secret !

Yeah, it came through OK.

Had some past trouble with the 'legal' size paper though.

Pretty much all paper sizes here ( and rest of world ) are now international
standards. Just the USA goes its own way with the stuff you enherited from us
Brits mainly I think - lol.


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been modded..
the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some of
the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
that were added. This console had 5 input channels modified by Audio
Upgrades, it looks as if the master module has been modified as well...looks
like I'll be calling Jim again.

Thanks for everyone's help!

Matt

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...
> > > Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing
> amps,
> > > correct?
> >
> > Ok - wondered if that might be so.
>
> According to the signal path diagram, they correspond to the summing amps.
> >
> > > You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
> > > are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those
pretty
> > > easily.
> >
> > The other op-amps operate at high signal levels so the noise
contribution
> there
> > won't be an issue.
> >
> > No need to replace.
> >
> > > If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?
> >
> > Well, I'd most likely use something like 4k7 feedback Rs in place of
22k.
> You
> > can't do that without altering the channel values though or the gain
> structure
> > gets screwed.
>
> Gotcha.
> >
> >
> > > And what does that 741 do?
> >
> > Given the quality of the fax it's tricky to say. Is there a peak led
there
> > though. Maybe that's it ?
> >
> Ah yes, that makes sense to be the signal/peak LED circuit, it uses a
> bicolor LED that is green with signal and red when within 3dB of clipping,
> according to the manual...
>
> When I get a chance I'll swap out those 5532's and we'll see what
> happens...thanks for all your help!!
>
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been modded..
the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some of
the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
that were added. This console had 5 input channels modified by Audio
Upgrades, it looks as if the master module has been modified as well...looks
like I'll be calling Jim again.

Thanks for everyone's help!

Matt

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...
> > > Those op amps are U1A and U1B, a=left b=right. . Those are the summing
> amps,
> > > correct?
> >
> > Ok - wondered if that might be so.
>
> According to the signal path diagram, they correspond to the summing amps.
> >
> > > You don't think the U5's (section D-4) could be a factor? All those
> > > are 5532's. The manual includes a PCB diagram so I can find those
pretty
> > > easily.
> >
> > The other op-amps operate at high signal levels so the noise
contribution
> there
> > won't be an issue.
> >
> > No need to replace.
> >
> > > If you were to replace those resistors, what would you recommend?
> >
> > Well, I'd most likely use something like 4k7 feedback Rs in place of
22k.
> You
> > can't do that without altering the channel values though or the gain
> structure
> > gets screwed.
>
> Gotcha.
> >
> >
> > > And what does that 741 do?
> >
> > Given the quality of the fax it's tricky to say. Is there a peak led
there
> > though. Maybe that's it ?
> >
> Ah yes, that makes sense to be the signal/peak LED circuit, it uses a
> bicolor LED that is green with signal and red when within 3dB of clipping,
> according to the manual...
>
> When I get a chance I'll swap out those 5532's and we'll see what
> happens...thanks for all your help!!
>
>
>

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>
> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels.


** Bet you have selected every mic channel simultaneously - right ?

Bet you have the monitor speakers next to your ears in a quiet room -
right ?

Bet you have a monitor amp with less than 1 volt input sensitivity -
right ?


Do I sound just a bit cynical ?????

Yep - cos I just spent hours, at the owners insistence, removing a faint
buzzing noise from a studio monitor amp that ONLY EXISTED when the input was
open circuit !!!!!





................. Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>
> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels.


** Bet you have selected every mic channel simultaneously - right ?

Bet you have the monitor speakers next to your ears in a quiet room -
right ?

Bet you have a monitor amp with less than 1 volt input sensitivity -
right ?


Do I sound just a bit cynical ?????

Yep - cos I just spent hours, at the owners insistence, removing a faint
buzzing noise from a studio monitor amp that ONLY EXISTED when the input was
open circuit !!!!!





................. Phil

[Matt Macchiarolo]

No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
> > For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
> >
> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> > noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the
faders,
> > even though there is no signal from any of the channels.
>
>
> ** Bet you have selected every mic channel simultaneously - right ?
>
> Bet you have the monitor speakers next to your ears in a quiet
om -
> right ?
>
> Bet you have a monitor amp with less than 1 volt input
nsitivity -
> right ?
>
>
> Do I sound just a bit cynical ?????
>
> Yep - cos I just spent hours, at the owners insistence, removing a
faint
> buzzing noise from a studio monitor amp that ONLY EXISTED when the input
was
> open circuit !!!!!
>
>
>
>
>
> ................ Phil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
> > For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
> >
> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> > noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the
faders,
> > even though there is no signal from any of the channels.
>
>
> ** Bet you have selected every mic channel simultaneously - right ?
>
> Bet you have the monitor speakers next to your ears in a quiet
om -
> right ?
>
> Bet you have a monitor amp with less than 1 volt input
nsitivity -
> right ?
>
>
> Do I sound just a bit cynical ?????
>
> Yep - cos I just spent hours, at the owners insistence, removing a
faint
> buzzing noise from a studio monitor amp that ONLY EXISTED when the input
was
> open circuit !!!!!
>
>
>
>
>
> ................ Phil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
>
> "Phil Allison"
>> >
>> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
>> > noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the
> faders, even though there is no signal from any of the channels.
>>
>>
>> ** Bet you have selected every mic channel simultaneously - right ?
>>
>> Bet you have the monitor speakers next to your ears in a quiet
> > room - right ?
>>
>> Bet you have a monitor amp with less than 1 volt input
>> sensitivity - right ?
>>

> No, no and no.


** So you selected no mic channels at all ???

Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????

Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????


> See the rest of this thread.



** The answers to my simple questions are not there.





.............. Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
>
> "Phil Allison"
>> >
>> > Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
>> > noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the
> faders, even though there is no signal from any of the channels.
>>
>>
>> ** Bet you have selected every mic channel simultaneously - right ?
>>
>> Bet you have the monitor speakers next to your ears in a quiet
> > room - right ?
>>
>> Bet you have a monitor amp with less than 1 volt input
>> sensitivity - right ?
>>

> No, no and no.


** So you selected no mic channels at all ???

Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????

Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????


> See the rest of this thread.



** The answers to my simple questions are not there.





.............. Phil

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.

Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.

He loves to jump to conclusions based on everyone else being stupider than him
!

Some actually *are* but not many.


Regds, Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.

Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.

He loves to jump to conclusions based on everyone else being stupider than him
!

Some actually *are* but not many.


Regds, Graham

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
>
> Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been
> modded..
> the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some
> of
> the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
> that were added.



** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
ones.

Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.






............. Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
>
> Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been
> modded..
> the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some
> of
> the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
> that were added.



** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
ones.

Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.






............. Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
>> No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.
>
> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>


** Says a pathetic pommy ****** who *failed to ask* the basic questions and
so wasted a lot of ASCII.


> He loves to jump to conclusions based on everyone else being stupider than
> him


** See above - the Pooh Brain just proved that assumption was good again.






.............. Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
>> No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.
>
> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>


** Says a pathetic pommy ****** who *failed to ask* the basic questions and
so wasted a lot of ASCII.


> He loves to jump to conclusions based on everyone else being stupider than
> him


** See above - the Pooh Brain just proved that assumption was good again.






.............. Phil

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been modded..
> the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some of
> the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
> that were added. This console had 5 input channels modified by Audio
> Upgrades, it looks as if the master module has been modified as well...looks
> like I'll be calling Jim again.

Ok - I pulled up the spec sheet for the LT1358.

It's a kind of 'esoteric' device.

http://www.linear.com.cn/prod/datasheet.html?datasheet=83

I wouldn't put it in an audio path without careful evaluation.

Suggest you replace parts with originals ! They probably worked fine !

Then it might sound better.

Idiots who do unsubstantiated 'upgrades' should be shot. I believe you have
access to guns in the USA ? Just joking !


Graahm

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been modded..
> the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some of
> the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
> that were added. This console had 5 input channels modified by Audio
> Upgrades, it looks as if the master module has been modified as well...looks
> like I'll be calling Jim again.

Ok - I pulled up the spec sheet for the LT1358.

It's a kind of 'esoteric' device.

http://www.linear.com.cn/prod/datasheet.html?datasheet=83

I wouldn't put it in an audio path without careful evaluation.

Suggest you replace parts with originals ! They probably worked fine !

Then it might sound better.

Idiots who do unsubstantiated 'upgrades' should be shot. I believe you have
access to guns in the USA ? Just joking !


Graahm

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.
>
> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.

Every group seems to have one.

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.
>
> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.

Every group seems to have one.

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"

>>
>> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>
> Every group seems to have one.
>



** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.

Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
thousands of know nothings.





............ Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"

>>
>> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>
> Every group seems to have one.
>



** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.

Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
thousands of know nothings.





............ Phil

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???

Correct.
>
> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????

Your hyperbole is noted.

>
> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
>
To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).


> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
>

Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice and an idea of where to
start, since I am not an EE.

Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
troubleshooting shortcomings.

To whom shall I pay attention?

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???

Correct.
>
> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????

Your hyperbole is noted.

>
> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
>
To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).


> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
>

Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice and an idea of where to
start, since I am not an EE.

Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
troubleshooting shortcomings.

To whom shall I pay attention?

[Matt Macchiarolo]

I'll try that, but seeing as there are some cap and resistor replacements
and additions, non-stock jumpers, and other modifications, it seems the
opamp replacements are only part of the picture. I'll still would like to
contact the fellow who did the mod on Monday. (He's got 4 of the input
channels now, anyway, for a different reason).

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been
modded..
> > the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and
some of
> > the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other
components
> > that were added. This console had 5 input channels modified by Audio
> > Upgrades, it looks as if the master module has been modified as
well...looks
> > like I'll be calling Jim again.
>
> Ok - I pulled up the spec sheet for the LT1358.
>
> It's a kind of 'esoteric' device.
>
> http://www.linear.com.cn/prod/datasheet.html?datasheet=83
>
> I wouldn't put it in an audio path without careful evaluation.
>
> Suggest you replace parts with originals ! They probably worked fine !
>
> Then it might sound better.
>
> Idiots who do unsubstantiated 'upgrades' should be shot. I believe you
have
> access to guns in the USA ? Just joking !
>
>
> Graahm
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

I'll try that, but seeing as there are some cap and resistor replacements
and additions, non-stock jumpers, and other modifications, it seems the
opamp replacements are only part of the picture. I'll still would like to
contact the fellow who did the mod on Monday. (He's got 4 of the input
channels now, anyway, for a different reason).

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been
modded..
> > the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and
some of
> > the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other
components
> > that were added. This console had 5 input channels modified by Audio
> > Upgrades, it looks as if the master module has been modified as
well...looks
> > like I'll be calling Jim again.
>
> Ok - I pulled up the spec sheet for the LT1358.
>
> It's a kind of 'esoteric' device.
>
> http://www.linear.com.cn/prod/datasheet.html?datasheet=83
>
> I wouldn't put it in an audio path without careful evaluation.
>
> Suggest you replace parts with originals ! They probably worked fine !
>
> Then it might sound better.
>
> Idiots who do unsubstantiated 'upgrades' should be shot. I believe you
have
> access to guns in the USA ? Just joking !
>
>
> Graahm
>

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Matt Macchiarolo"
> >
> > Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been
> > modded..
> > the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some
> > of
> > the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
> > that were added.
>
> ** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
> ones.
>
> Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.
>
> ............ Phil

Yup.

I just said as much. Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
but it's not a part I'd commend for audio.

Good to see you agree.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Matt Macchiarolo"
> >
> > Well I just pulled the master module and it looks like it has been
> > modded..
> > the 5532 in question seems to have been replaced with an LT1358, and some
> > of
> > the others were replaced with TLE2082's, along with some other components
> > that were added.
>
> ** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
> ones.
>
> Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.
>
> ............ Phil

Yup.

I just said as much. Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
but it's not a part I'd commend for audio.

Good to see you agree.


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

It's been a long while since I frequented this group, and I remember most of
your so-called "trolls." Funny, I don't remember you.

You didn't mention Fletcher, either...

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
>
> >>
> >> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
> >
> > Every group seems to have one.
> >
>
>
>
> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.
>
> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
> thousands of know nothings.
>
>
>
>
>
> ........... Phil
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

It's been a long while since I frequented this group, and I remember most of
your so-called "trolls." Funny, I don't remember you.

You didn't mention Fletcher, either...

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
>
> >>
> >> Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
> >
> > Every group seems to have one.
> >
>
>
>
> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.
>
> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
> thousands of know nothings.
>
>
>
>
>
> ........... Phil
>
>

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
>
>> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???
>
> Correct.


** So no channel assign buttons selected at all ???

What a useless way to do a test.



>>
>> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????
>
> Your hyperbole is noted.
>


** So is your non answer, over sniping and smartarse attitude.



>> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
>>
> To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
> Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).
>
>
>> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
>>
>
> Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice ...



** You are not capable of judging what is "good" advice.



> Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
> troubleshooting shortcomings.


** Since all the others had failed to ask you the basic questions.


>
> To whom shall I pay attention?


** ****heads like you invariably accept the advice they wanted to hear.

Salesmen on the make can play your kind like a piano.





................. Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
>
>> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???
>
> Correct.


** So no channel assign buttons selected at all ???

What a useless way to do a test.



>>
>> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????
>
> Your hyperbole is noted.
>


** So is your non answer, over sniping and smartarse attitude.



>> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
>>
> To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
> Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).
>
>
>> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
>>
>
> Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice ...



** You are not capable of judging what is "good" advice.



> Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
> troubleshooting shortcomings.


** Since all the others had failed to ask you the basic questions.


>
> To whom shall I pay attention?


** ****heads like you invariably accept the advice they wanted to hear.

Salesmen on the make can play your kind like a piano.





................. Phil

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.
> >
> > Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>
> Every group seems to have one.

He's a classic !

Shame really since he's quite knowledgeable. Thing is - he has no
personal ...... errrrrr .. anything

No redeeming features. He just likes to pop shots at others.

Gets boring.

Anyway - I suggest you replace your ICs with the original parts
specified. It may sound better then.

You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !

The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.



Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > No, no and no. See the rest of this thread.
> >
> > Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>
> Every group seems to have one.

He's a classic !

Shame really since he's quite knowledgeable. Thing is - he has no
personal ...... errrrrr .. anything

No redeeming features. He just likes to pop shots at others.

Gets boring.

Anyway - I suggest you replace your ICs with the original parts
specified. It may sound better then.

You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !

The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.



Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

>
> You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !
>
> The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.

No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great deal
so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better than the
Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).

[Matt Macchiarolo]

>
> You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !
>
> The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.

No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great deal
so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better than the
Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> I'll try that,

Shooting him ? Yeah - might work.

> but seeing as there are some cap and resistor replacements
> and additions, non-stock jumpers, and other modifications, it seems the
> opamp replacements are only part of the picture. I'll still would like to
> contact the fellow who did the mod on Monday. (He's got 4 of the input
> channels now, anyway, for a different reason).

Hmmmmm !

I recommend restoring to original spec.

Looks like ppl have been fiddling without knowing their stuff.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> I'll try that,

Shooting him ? Yeah - might work.

> but seeing as there are some cap and resistor replacements
> and additions, non-stock jumpers, and other modifications, it seems the
> opamp replacements are only part of the picture. I'll still would like to
> contact the fellow who did the mod on Monday. (He's got 4 of the input
> channels now, anyway, for a different reason).

Hmmmmm !

I recommend restoring to original spec.

Looks like ppl have been fiddling without knowing their stuff.


Graham

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
> Phil Allison wrote:

>> ** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
>> ones.
>>
>> Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.
>
> Yup.
>
> I just said as much.


** My post was 30 minutes before yours.


> Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise


** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
nV/rt Hz


> but it's not a part I'd commend for audio.


** Who gives a flying **** what some Bear decides to pompously "commend"
???????

>
> Good to see you agree.


** Drop dead.




............... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
> Phil Allison wrote:

>> ** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
>> ones.
>>
>> Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.
>
> Yup.
>
> I just said as much.


** My post was 30 minutes before yours.


> Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise


** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
nV/rt Hz


> but it's not a part I'd commend for audio.


** Who gives a flying **** what some Bear decides to pompously "commend"
???????

>
> Good to see you agree.


** Drop dead.




............... Phil

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> > You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !
> >
> > The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.
>
> No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great deal
> so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better than the
> Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).

LOL !

You won't find many Mackie fans here.

Except maybe for SRM 450s - I have to admit they don't sound bad ( oh, except
for the so-called mic pre ) . I guess RCF had something to do with that ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> > You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !
> >
> > The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.
>
> No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great deal
> so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better than the
> Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).

LOL !

You won't find many Mackie fans here.

Except maybe for SRM 450s - I have to admit they don't sound bad ( oh, except
for the so-called mic pre ) . I guess RCF had something to do with that ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Pooh Bear wrote:

> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > > You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !
> > >
> > > The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.
> >
> > No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great deal
> > so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better than the
> > Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).
>
> LOL !
>
> You won't find many Mackie fans here.
>
> Except maybe for SRM 450s - I have to admit they don't sound bad ( oh, except
> for the so-called mic pre ) . I guess RCF had something to do with that ?

Ooops !

I mean RCF made the SRM 450 sound good - didn't mean to infer anytrhing about the
mic pre-amp !

The SRM mic pre is abominable. Don't know why they ( Mackie ) bothered frankly !


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Pooh Bear wrote:

> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > > You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you !
> > >
> > > The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.
> >
> > No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great deal
> > so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better than the
> > Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).
>
> LOL !
>
> You won't find many Mackie fans here.
>
> Except maybe for SRM 450s - I have to admit they don't sound bad ( oh, except
> for the so-called mic pre ) . I guess RCF had something to do with that ?

Ooops !

I mean RCF made the SRM 450 sound good - didn't mean to infer anytrhing about the
mic pre-amp !

The SRM mic pre is abominable. Don't know why they ( Mackie ) bothered frankly !


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Pooh Bear"
> > Phil Allison wrote:
>
> >> ** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
> >> ones.
> >>
> >> Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.
> >
> > Yup.
> >
> > I just said as much.
>
> ** My post was 30 minutes before yours.

Bully for you !

I wasn't watching the clock myself.


> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
>
> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
> nV/rt Hz

Wow you can't even get the numbers right !


> > but it's not a part I'd commend for audio.
>
> ** Who gives a flying **** what some Bear decides to pompously "commend"
> ???????
>
> > Good to see you agree.
>
> ** Drop dead.

< plonk >

I suggest you ignore PA's posts - they cause offence here ( and elsewhere no
doubt too ) .



Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Pooh Bear"
> > Phil Allison wrote:
>
> >> ** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high speed
> >> ones.
> >>
> >> Some audiophool "gong beater" has been let loose at the desk.
> >
> > Yup.
> >
> > I just said as much.
>
> ** My post was 30 minutes before yours.

Bully for you !

I wasn't watching the clock myself.


> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
>
> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
> nV/rt Hz

Wow you can't even get the numbers right !


> > but it's not a part I'd commend for audio.
>
> ** Who gives a flying **** what some Bear decides to pompously "commend"
> ???????
>
> > Good to see you agree.
>
> ** Drop dead.

< plonk >

I suggest you ignore PA's posts - they cause offence here ( and elsewhere no
doubt too ) .



Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable difference,
granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to get
it looked at before my next mix session.

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Pooh Bear wrote:
>
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > > You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you
!
> > > >
> > > > The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.
> > >
> > > No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great
deal
> > > so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better
than the
> > > Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).
> >
> > LOL !
> >
> > You won't find many Mackie fans here.
> >
> > Except maybe for SRM 450s - I have to admit they don't sound bad ( oh,
except
> > for the so-called mic pre ) . I guess RCF had something to do with that
?
>
> Ooops !
>
> I mean RCF made the SRM 450 sound good - didn't mean to infer anytrhing
about the
> mic pre-amp !
>
> The SRM mic pre is abominable. Don't know why they ( Mackie ) bothered
frankly !
>
>
> Graham
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable difference,
granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to get
it looked at before my next mix session.

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Pooh Bear wrote:
>
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> > > > You might also care to kick the arse of the bloke who sold it to you
!
> > > >
> > > > The schematics suggest it's one of Peavey's better consoles btw.
> > >
> > > No worries, I knew I would have to do some work on it. It was a great
deal
> > > so I really don't mind. Even with the noise, it sounds much better
than the
> > > Mackie 8-bus it replaced (flame suit on).
> >
> > LOL !
> >
> > You won't find many Mackie fans here.
> >
> > Except maybe for SRM 450s - I have to admit they don't sound bad ( oh,
except
> > for the so-called mic pre ) . I guess RCF had something to do with that
?
>
> Ooops !
>
> I mean RCF made the SRM 450 sound good - didn't mean to infer anytrhing
about the
> mic pre-amp !
>
> The SRM mic pre is abominable. Don't know why they ( Mackie ) bothered
frankly !
>
>
> Graham
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Sounds like someone didn't get enough attention from Mommy and Daddy. Bye
bye. <plunk>

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
> >
> >> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???
> >
> > Correct.
>
>
> ** So no channel assign buttons selected at all ???
>
> What a useless way to do a test.
>
>
>
> >>
> >> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????
> >
> > Your hyperbole is noted.
> >
>
>
> ** So is your non answer, over sniping and smartarse attitude.
>
>
>
> >> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
> >>
> > To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
> > Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).
> >
> >
> >> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
> >>
> >
> > Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice ...
>
>
>
> ** You are not capable of judging what is "good" advice.
>
>
>
> > Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
> > troubleshooting shortcomings.
>
>
> ** Since all the others had failed to ask you the basic questions.
>
>
> >
> > To whom shall I pay attention?
>
>
> ** ****heads like you invariably accept the advice they wanted to hear.
>
> Salesmen on the make can play your kind like a piano.
>
>
>
>
>
> ................ Phil
>
>
>
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

Sounds like someone didn't get enough attention from Mommy and Daddy. Bye
bye. <plunk>

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
> >
> >> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???
> >
> > Correct.
>
>
> ** So no channel assign buttons selected at all ???
>
> What a useless way to do a test.
>
>
>
> >>
> >> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????
> >
> > Your hyperbole is noted.
> >
>
>
> ** So is your non answer, over sniping and smartarse attitude.
>
>
>
> >> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
> >>
> > To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
> > Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).
> >
> >
> >> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
> >>
> >
> > Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice ...
>
>
>
> ** You are not capable of judging what is "good" advice.
>
>
>
> > Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
> > troubleshooting shortcomings.
>
>
> ** Since all the others had failed to ask you the basic questions.
>
>
> >
> > To whom shall I pay attention?
>
>
> ** ****heads like you invariably accept the advice they wanted to hear.
>
> Salesmen on the make can play your kind like a piano.
>
>
>
>
>
> ................ Phil
>
>
>
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable difference,
> granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to get
> it looked at before my next mix session.

Kind of expected that ( as per previous posts ) .

Your bus noise is either thermally dominated ( resistor values that you can't
easily change throughout ) or op-amp input noise dominated. Would have to take a
few minutes to do the the calculations.

Are you sure that the result is unacceptable ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:

> Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable difference,
> granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to get
> it looked at before my next mix session.

Kind of expected that ( as per previous posts ) .

Your bus noise is either thermally dominated ( resistor values that you can't
easily change throughout ) or op-amp input noise dominated. Would have to take a
few minutes to do the the calculations.

Are you sure that the result is unacceptable ?


Graham

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable
difference,
> > granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to
get
> > it looked at before my next mix session.
>
> Kind of expected that ( as per previous posts ) .
>
> Your bus noise is either thermally dominated ( resistor values that you
can't
> easily change throughout ) or op-amp input noise dominated. Would have to
take a
> few minutes to do the the calculations.
>
> Are you sure that the result is unacceptable ?
>

It really depends on the project. Some mixes won't be affected, but some
will. I expect some noise of course, but not enough to notice without input
from the channels.

Thanks again for all your help!

Matt

[Matt Macchiarolo]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> > Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable
difference,
> > granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to
get
> > it looked at before my next mix session.
>
> Kind of expected that ( as per previous posts ) .
>
> Your bus noise is either thermally dominated ( resistor values that you
can't
> easily change throughout ) or op-amp input noise dominated. Would have to
take a
> few minutes to do the the calculations.
>
> Are you sure that the result is unacceptable ?
>

It really depends on the project. Some mixes won't be affected, but some
will. I expect some noise of course, but not enough to notice without input
from the channels.

Thanks again for all your help!

Matt

[Geoff Wood]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message

> TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments
> who
> originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes
> vary
> from manufacturer to manufacturer.


I just picked up a pair of Dobly 361 and SR modules (for very little $$$!) .
The SR cards are just full of TL072's (not to mention tantalum caps).
Considering much of the well-considered analogue recording in the last 15
years has been thru SRs, I think you needn't feel too insecure abgout their
presence.

They don't 'wear out' to my knowledge. However some capacitors do, sort of.

Sometime a suffux may indicate low noise (5532A v 5532AN, I think ...) . But
is more often indicating things like packaging.


geoff

[Geoff Wood]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message

> TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments
> who
> originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes
> vary
> from manufacturer to manufacturer.


I just picked up a pair of Dobly 361 and SR modules (for very little $$$!) .
The SR cards are just full of TL072's (not to mention tantalum caps).
Considering much of the well-considered analogue recording in the last 15
years has been thru SRs, I think you needn't feel too insecure abgout their
presence.

They don't 'wear out' to my knowledge. However some capacitors do, sort of.

Sometime a suffux may indicate low noise (5532A v 5532AN, I think ...) . But
is more often indicating things like packaging.


geoff

[Geoff Wood]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
>> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>>
>> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
>> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
>> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called
>> Peavey's
>> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
>> as
>> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
>> white noise).
>
> That's total rubbish.
>
> I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
> encapsualation defect.

I regualrly service SM consoles where the opamps (4560s) have breifly gone
noisy. Noisy like a 'snap crackle pop' as they blow up and burn !

;-)

gepff

[Geoff Wood]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
>> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
>>
>> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
>> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
>> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called
>> Peavey's
>> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
>> as
>> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
>> white noise).
>
> That's total rubbish.
>
> I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
> encapsualation defect.

I regualrly service SM consoles where the opamps (4560s) have breifly gone
noisy. Noisy like a 'snap crackle pop' as they blow up and burn !

;-)

gepff

[Pooh Bear]

Geoff Wood wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
>
> > TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments
> > who
> > originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes
> > vary
> > from manufacturer to manufacturer.
>
> I just picked up a pair of Dobly 361 and SR modules (for very little $$$!) .
> The SR cards are just full of TL072's (not to mention tantalum caps).
> Considering much of the well-considered analogue recording in the last 15
> years has been thru SRs, I think you needn't feel too insecure abgout their
> presence.
>
> They don't 'wear out' to my knowledge. However some capacitors do, sort of.
>
> Sometime a suffux may indicate low noise (5532A v 5532AN, I think ...) . But
> is more often indicating things like packaging.

Hmmm Cat 22s ?

TL07xs were well considered in their day.

They still have their uses.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Geoff Wood wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
>
> > TL072s in this product are likely to be TL072CP in TI ( Texas Instruments
> > who
> > originated them ) speak - commercial plastic 8 pin dil - but the suffixes
> > vary
> > from manufacturer to manufacturer.
>
> I just picked up a pair of Dobly 361 and SR modules (for very little $$$!) .
> The SR cards are just full of TL072's (not to mention tantalum caps).
> Considering much of the well-considered analogue recording in the last 15
> years has been thru SRs, I think you needn't feel too insecure abgout their
> presence.
>
> They don't 'wear out' to my knowledge. However some capacitors do, sort of.
>
> Sometime a suffux may indicate low noise (5532A v 5532AN, I think ...) . But
> is more often indicating things like packaging.

Hmmm Cat 22s ?

TL07xs were well considered in their day.

They still have their uses.


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Geoff Wood wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> >> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
> >>
> >> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> >> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> >> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called
> >> Peavey's
> >> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
> >> as
> >> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> >> white noise).
> >
> > That's total rubbish.
> >
> > I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
> > encapsualation defect.
>
> I regualrly service SM consoles where the opamps (4560s) have breifly gone
> noisy. Noisy like a 'snap crackle pop' as they blow up and burn !

Intruiging.

Never had a prob with the DIL versions.

Pcb processing to blame ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Geoff Wood wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
> >
> >> For you op-amp experts I need some advice...
> >>
> >> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> >> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> >> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called
> >> Peavey's
> >> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module,
> >> as
> >> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> >> white noise).
> >
> > That's total rubbish.
> >
> > I'd only expect on op-amp to go noisy if there was a manufacturing or
> > encapsualation defect.
>
> I regualrly service SM consoles where the opamps (4560s) have breifly gone
> noisy. Noisy like a 'snap crackle pop' as they blow up and burn !

Intruiging.

Never had a prob with the DIL versions.

Pcb processing to blame ?


Graham

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
> Phil Allison wrote:

>
>> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
>>
>> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
>> nV/rt Hz
>
> Wow you can't even get the numbers right !


** The 3.5 nV figure is from a Philips Handbook - the 8nV figure from the
LT web site.

Where are your figures - ****head ???

Nowhere to be seen as bloody usual.




>
> I suggest you ignore PA's posts


** Pooh is a most dangerous fool - and a big, big, liar.




............... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
> Phil Allison wrote:

>
>> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
>>
>> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
>> nV/rt Hz
>
> Wow you can't even get the numbers right !


** The 3.5 nV figure is from a Philips Handbook - the 8nV figure from the
LT web site.

Where are your figures - ****head ???

Nowhere to be seen as bloody usual.




>
> I suggest you ignore PA's posts


** Pooh is a most dangerous fool - and a big, big, liar.




............... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
> Sounds like someone didn't get enough attention from Mommy and Daddy. Bye
> bye. <plunk>


** Top posting narcissist.

Yet another one.


.............. Phil



> "Phil Allison" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Matt Macchiarolo"
>> >
>> >> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???
>> >
>> > Correct.
>>
>>
>> ** So no channel assign buttons selected at all ???
>>
>> What a useless way to do a test.
>>
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????
>> >
>> > Your hyperbole is noted.
>> >
>>
>>
>> ** So is your non answer, over sniping and smartarse attitude.
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
>> >>
>> > To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
>> > Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).
>> >
>> >
>> >> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice ...
>>
>>
>>
>> ** You are not capable of judging what is "good" advice.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
>> > troubleshooting shortcomings.
>>
>>
>> ** Since all the others had failed to ask you the basic questions.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > To whom shall I pay attention?
>>
>>
>> ** ****heads like you invariably accept the advice they wanted to hear.
>>
>> Salesmen on the make can play your kind like a piano.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ................ Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Phil Allison]

"Matt Macchiarolo"
> Sounds like someone didn't get enough attention from Mommy and Daddy. Bye
> bye. <plunk>


** Top posting narcissist.

Yet another one.


.............. Phil



> "Phil Allison" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Matt Macchiarolo"
>> >
>> >> ** So you selected no mic channels at all ???
>> >
>> > Correct.
>>
>>
>> ** So no channel assign buttons selected at all ???
>>
>> What a useless way to do a test.
>>
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >> Have the speakers miles away in a noisy room ????
>> >
>> > Your hyperbole is noted.
>> >
>>
>>
>> ** So is your non answer, over sniping and smartarse attitude.
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Have an amp with more than 1 volt sensitivity ?????
>> >>
>> > To be fair I'm not sure, can't remember the specs on the amps (Tannoy
>> > Limpets right now, just while I am connecting the console).
>> >
>> >
>> >> ** The answers to my simple questions are not there.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Let's see, Graham and others gave me good advice ...
>>
>>
>>
>> ** You are not capable of judging what is "good" advice.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Phil came in at the end of the thread and attempted to point out my
>> > troubleshooting shortcomings.
>>
>>
>> ** Since all the others had failed to ask you the basic questions.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > To whom shall I pay attention?
>>
>>
>> ** ****heads like you invariably accept the advice they wanted to hear.
>>
>> Salesmen on the make can play your kind like a piano.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ................ Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Pooh Bear"
> > Phil Allison wrote:
>
> >> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
> >>
> >> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
> >> nV/rt Hz
> >
> > Wow you can't even get the numbers right !
>
> ** The 3.5 nV figure is from a Philips Handbook - the 8nV figure from the
> LT web site.
>
> Where are your figures - ****head ???
>
> Nowhere to be seen as bloody usual.

Total crap as usual from PA.

5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.

http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/ne5532a.html

Stick that where it hurts and shove off you OZ clown !


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Pooh Bear"
> > Phil Allison wrote:
>
> >> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
> >>
> >> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus 8
> >> nV/rt Hz
> >
> > Wow you can't even get the numbers right !
>
> ** The 3.5 nV figure is from a Philips Handbook - the 8nV figure from the
> LT web site.
>
> Where are your figures - ****head ???
>
> Nowhere to be seen as bloody usual.

Total crap as usual from PA.

5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.

http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/ne5532a.html

Stick that where it hurts and shove off you OZ clown !


Graham

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear" = **** Naked
> Phil Allison wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high
>>>>>speed
>>>>> ones.
>>>>>
>> >> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
>> >>
>> >> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus
>> >> 8
>> >> nV/rt Hz
>> >
>> > Wow you can't even get the numbers right !
>>
>> ** The 3.5 nV figure is from a Philips Handbook - the 8nV figure from
>> the
>> LT web site.
>>
>> Where are your figures - ****head ???
>>
>> Nowhere to be seen as bloody usual.
>
> Total crap as usual from PA.


** You did not supply *any * figures - you lying arsehole.


> 5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.


** Still a big difference in favour of the 5532 over the 1358

In practical circuits the noise levels of 5534s and 5532s are much the
same.






............... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear" = **** Naked
> Phil Allison wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>** The LT1358 and TLE2082 are not low noise ICs - they are high
>>>>>speed
>>>>> ones.
>>>>>
>> >> > Actually, the LT1358 is similar to the NE5532 noise wise
>> >>
>> >> ** Bull**** - it is at least 7 dB worse - 3.5nV/rt Hz versus
>> >> 8
>> >> nV/rt Hz
>> >
>> > Wow you can't even get the numbers right !
>>
>> ** The 3.5 nV figure is from a Philips Handbook - the 8nV figure from
>> the
>> LT web site.
>>
>> Where are your figures - ****head ???
>>
>> Nowhere to be seen as bloody usual.
>
> Total crap as usual from PA.


** You did not supply *any * figures - you lying arsehole.


> 5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.


** Still a big difference in favour of the 5532 over the 1358

In practical circuits the noise levels of 5534s and 5532s are much the
same.






............... Phil

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" wrote :
>
> > Total crap as usual from PA.
>
> ** You did not supply *any * figures - you lying arsehole.

Nobody asked for any *figures* you posturing **** !


> > 5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.
>
> ** Still a big difference in favour of the 5532 over the 1358

Actually about half the difference you were claiming !

I recommended he replaced the 1358s with the original 5532s anyway, you
clueless idiot ! I guess you weren't reading the thread - just looking to find
something to criticise.

You sad *******.

< plonk > ( again )


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" wrote :
>
> > Total crap as usual from PA.
>
> ** You did not supply *any * figures - you lying arsehole.

Nobody asked for any *figures* you posturing **** !


> > 5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.
>
> ** Still a big difference in favour of the 5532 over the 1358

Actually about half the difference you were claiming !

I recommended he replaced the 1358s with the original 5532s anyway, you
clueless idiot ! I guess you weren't reading the thread - just looking to find
something to criticise.

You sad *******.

< plonk > ( again )


Graham

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
Phil Allison wrote:
>>
>> ** You did not supply *any * figures - you lying arsehole.
>
> Nobody asked for any *figures* you posturing **** !


** Figures *are* always needed when you slam ones that someone has supplied
!!!

You foul smelling, Pooh Brained, ex DJ.



>> > 5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.
>>
>> ** Still a big difference in favour of the 5532 over the 1358
>
> Actually about half the difference you were claiming !


** Still contrary to your *no figures supplied* abusive assertion.


> I recommended he replaced the 1358s with the original 5532s anyway, you
> clueless idiot !


** Without any figures or facts.


>I guess you weren't reading the thread


** Wading through your mindless piles of Pooh is pretty vile.

Your lack of a professional or even vaguely rational approach to technical
advice giving was sickening.





................ Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Pooh Bear"
Phil Allison wrote:
>>
>> ** You did not supply *any * figures - you lying arsehole.
>
> Nobody asked for any *figures* you posturing **** !


** Figures *are* always needed when you slam ones that someone has supplied
!!!

You foul smelling, Pooh Brained, ex DJ.



>> > 5532s have 5nV / rt Hz input noise. Only 5534s claim 3.5 nV / rt Hz.
>>
>> ** Still a big difference in favour of the 5532 over the 1358
>
> Actually about half the difference you were claiming !


** Still contrary to your *no figures supplied* abusive assertion.


> I recommended he replaced the 1358s with the original 5532s anyway, you
> clueless idiot !


** Without any figures or facts.


>I guess you weren't reading the thread


** Wading through your mindless piles of Pooh is pretty vile.

Your lack of a professional or even vaguely rational approach to technical
advice giving was sickening.





................ Phil

[Peter B.]

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message >...

>
> ** Says a pathetic pommy ****** who *failed to ask* the basic questions and
> so wasted a lot of ASCII.



What is a 'pommy'?

[Peter B.]

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message >...

>
> ** Says a pathetic pommy ****** who *failed to ask* the basic questions and
> so wasted a lot of ASCII.



What is a 'pommy'?

[Phil Allison]

"Peter B."
"Phil Allison"
>
>>
>> ** Says a pathetic pommy ****** who *failed to ask* the basic questions
>> and
>> so wasted a lot of ASCII.
>
>
> What is a 'pommy'?


** Bit like a Septic Tank - but from the UK.




........... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Peter B."
"Phil Allison"
>
>>
>> ** Says a pathetic pommy ****** who *failed to ask* the basic questions
>> and
>> so wasted a lot of ASCII.
>
>
> What is a 'pommy'?


** Bit like a Septic Tank - but from the UK.




........... Phil

[Scott Dorsey]

Matt Macchiarolo > wrote:
>It's been a long while since I frequented this group, and I remember most of
>your so-called "trolls." Funny, I don't remember you.
>
>You didn't mention Fletcher, either...

Phil is fairly new. He seems to have leaked here from aus.electronics
somehow. He isn't taken very seriously but he seems to have pretty more
persistent than most.

Fletcher basically was driven off the group by the poor S/N and by his
ISP's lousy news feed. He hasn't been here in ages. I miss him a lot.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Matt Macchiarolo > wrote:
>It's been a long while since I frequented this group, and I remember most of
>your so-called "trolls." Funny, I don't remember you.
>
>You didn't mention Fletcher, either...

Phil is fairly new. He seems to have leaked here from aus.electronics
somehow. He isn't taken very seriously but he seems to have pretty more
persistent than most.

Fletcher basically was driven off the group by the poor S/N and by his
ISP's lousy news feed. He hasn't been here in ages. I miss him a lot.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Matt Macchiarolo > wrote:
>Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable difference,
>granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to get
>it looked at before my next mix session.

Put the board on an extender and put an AM radio next to it. Is it causing
radio interference? If you got a scope, poke around on supply lines and
signal pins and look for something fuzzy.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Matt Macchiarolo > wrote:
>Graham, I replaced U1 with a 5532 and there was no appreciable difference,
>granted my test was just my ears. It's useable for now, I just need to get
>it looked at before my next mix session.

Put the board on an extender and put an AM radio next to it. Is it causing
radio interference? If you got a scope, poke around on supply lines and
signal pins and look for something fuzzy.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Matt Macchiarolo]

>
> Fletcher basically was driven off the group by the poor S/N and by his
> ISP's lousy news feed.

Too bad. The S/N is a lot worse now than it was in 1999...

[Matt Macchiarolo]

>
> Fletcher basically was driven off the group by the poor S/N and by his
> ISP's lousy news feed.

Too bad. The S/N is a lot worse now than it was in 1999...

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> Put the board on an extender and put an AM radio next to it. Is it
causing
> radio interference? If you got a scope, poke around on supply lines and
> signal pins and look for something fuzzy.
> --scott
>
I think I have filter cap going bad in the powersupply (it generates a
slightly audible 60hz from the P/S case) but I didn't look to that being the
source of my noise because my noise isn't a 60hz hum, it's more like white
(thermal) noise, and it's on only the l/r buss outputs. Considering all the
mods that have been done to the master module, I think it's safe to say it's
somewhere in there...

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> Put the board on an extender and put an AM radio next to it. Is it
causing
> radio interference? If you got a scope, poke around on supply lines and
> signal pins and look for something fuzzy.
> --scott
>
I think I have filter cap going bad in the powersupply (it generates a
slightly audible 60hz from the P/S case) but I didn't look to that being the
source of my noise because my noise isn't a 60hz hum, it's more like white
(thermal) noise, and it's on only the l/r buss outputs. Considering all the
mods that have been done to the master module, I think it's safe to say it's
somewhere in there...

[Scott Dorsey]

Matt Macchiarolo > wrote:
>
>> Put the board on an extender and put an AM radio next to it. Is it
>causing
>> radio interference? If you got a scope, poke around on supply lines and
>> signal pins and look for something fuzzy.
>>
>I think I have filter cap going bad in the powersupply (it generates a
>slightly audible 60hz from the P/S case) but I didn't look to that being the
>source of my noise because my noise isn't a 60hz hum, it's more like white
>(thermal) noise, and it's on only the l/r buss outputs. Considering all the
>mods that have been done to the master module, I think it's safe to say it's
>somewhere in there...

I'm not talking about hum, I'm talking about oscillation well above the
audio band. The side effects from that can include wideband audible noise
and reduced headroom, as well as chips getting really hot.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Matt Macchiarolo > wrote:
>
>> Put the board on an extender and put an AM radio next to it. Is it
>causing
>> radio interference? If you got a scope, poke around on supply lines and
>> signal pins and look for something fuzzy.
>>
>I think I have filter cap going bad in the powersupply (it generates a
>slightly audible 60hz from the P/S case) but I didn't look to that being the
>source of my noise because my noise isn't a 60hz hum, it's more like white
>(thermal) noise, and it's on only the l/r buss outputs. Considering all the
>mods that have been done to the master module, I think it's safe to say it's
>somewhere in there...

I'm not talking about hum, I'm talking about oscillation well above the
audio band. The side effects from that can include wideband audible noise
and reduced headroom, as well as chips getting really hot.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Do I sound just a bit cynical ?????
>
> Yep - cos I just spent hours, at the owners insistence, removing a faint
> buzzing noise from a studio monitor amp that ONLY EXISTED when the input was
> open circuit !!!!!

That's a pretty good trick. Did you give him a short circuit to use?

I find that all too many people complain about "noise" in their system
that it turns out is only audible when they have the monitor gain up
so high that they'd blow their speakers (and windows) if they actually
tried to listen to a normal recording at that level. My Soundcraft is
like that - I can hear some noise when I push up the Master fader even
with all the inputs down (and assigned or not).

The difference between the original poster and me is that I measured
the noise. WIth the master at its design center position, the noise
output is about -77 dBu. Since the nominal music level is some 80 dB
higher than that, I don't worry about it. But at least I've quantified it. If
we knew just how much noise the guy with the Peavy had we'd be in
a better place to judge whether he should be worried about it or not. But
since he's just using his ears on speakers, we don't have a clue.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Do I sound just a bit cynical ?????
>
> Yep - cos I just spent hours, at the owners insistence, removing a faint
> buzzing noise from a studio monitor amp that ONLY EXISTED when the input was
> open circuit !!!!!

That's a pretty good trick. Did you give him a short circuit to use?

I find that all too many people complain about "noise" in their system
that it turns out is only audible when they have the monitor gain up
so high that they'd blow their speakers (and windows) if they actually
tried to listen to a normal recording at that level. My Soundcraft is
like that - I can hear some noise when I push up the Master fader even
with all the inputs down (and assigned or not).

The difference between the original poster and me is that I measured
the noise. WIth the master at its design center position, the noise
output is about -77 dBu. Since the nominal music level is some 80 dB
higher than that, I don't worry about it. But at least I've quantified it. If
we knew just how much noise the guy with the Peavy had we'd be in
a better place to judge whether he should be worried about it or not. But
since he's just using his ears on speakers, we don't have a clue.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> It's been a long while since I frequented this group, and I remember most of
> your so-called "trolls." Funny, I don't remember you.
>
> You didn't mention Fletcher, either...

Fletcher doesn't hang around here any more. (some lame excuse about
his ISP not handling Usenet) But as I recall he has a fairly good
opinion of the AMR console - that it sounds better than most of its
size and price range.

I'd definitely check out the modification situation. If it was Jim
Williams who acutally did the mod (or at least designed it if he
wasn't the one who put in the parts) even if it's based on op-amps
that aren't normally used in audio circuitry, chances are he's given
enough thought to it to use them properly, and to good advantage.
That's what he does.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> It's been a long while since I frequented this group, and I remember most of
> your so-called "trolls." Funny, I don't remember you.
>
> You didn't mention Fletcher, either...

Fletcher doesn't hang around here any more. (some lame excuse about
his ISP not handling Usenet) But as I recall he has a fairly good
opinion of the AMR console - that it sounds better than most of its
size and price range.

I'd definitely check out the modification situation. If it was Jim
Williams who acutally did the mod (or at least designed it if he
wasn't the one who put in the parts) even if it's based on op-amps
that aren't normally used in audio circuitry, chances are he's given
enough thought to it to use them properly, and to good advantage.
That's what he does.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Matt Macchiarolo]

>
> The difference between the original poster and me is that I measured
> the noise. WIth the master at its design center position, the noise
> output is about -77 dBu. Since the nominal music level is some 80 dB
> higher than that, I don't worry about it. But at least I've quantified it.
If
> we knew just how much noise the guy with the Peavy had we'd be in
> a better place to judge whether he should be worried about it or not. But
> since he's just using his ears on speakers, we don't have a clue.

Mike,

Haven't yet had a chance to measure the noise yet. But that is on the to-do
list. I did notice in when I threw up a quick mix on the console at a
moderate volume level...when I stopped the tape machine, I could hear it. So
I pulled all the channel faders down thinking it was the cumulative noise of
each channel but it wasn't. The noise isn't in any of the aux or efx busses,
just the main l-r bus.

[Matt Macchiarolo]

>
> The difference between the original poster and me is that I measured
> the noise. WIth the master at its design center position, the noise
> output is about -77 dBu. Since the nominal music level is some 80 dB
> higher than that, I don't worry about it. But at least I've quantified it.
If
> we knew just how much noise the guy with the Peavy had we'd be in
> a better place to judge whether he should be worried about it or not. But
> since he's just using his ears on speakers, we don't have a clue.

Mike,

Haven't yet had a chance to measure the noise yet. But that is on the to-do
list. I did notice in when I threw up a quick mix on the console at a
moderate volume level...when I stopped the tape machine, I could hear it. So
I pulled all the channel faders down thinking it was the cumulative noise of
each channel but it wasn't. The noise isn't in any of the aux or efx busses,
just the main l-r bus.

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> I'd definitely check out the modification situation. If it was Jim
> Williams who acutally did the mod (or at least designed it if he
> wasn't the one who put in the parts) even if it's based on op-amps
> that aren't normally used in audio circuitry, chances are he's given
> enough thought to it to use them properly, and to good advantage.
> That's what he does.

My thoughts exactly. 5 of the input channels have installed his mic preamp,
I am assuming he did the install, and apparently he offered some sort of mod
on the master module as well, so I am assuming he did this mod as well. (The
literature that came with the console included a Audio Upgrades catalog.)
Both the mods on the input channels and the master module involve more than
just swapping op amps, there are several other components swapped or added
too...but like I said in a previous post, although I can read the numbers on
a chip and I can tell the difference between a stock input channel PCB and
the modified ones, I am not an EE so my expertise ends with "There's
something different."

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> I'd definitely check out the modification situation. If it was Jim
> Williams who acutally did the mod (or at least designed it if he
> wasn't the one who put in the parts) even if it's based on op-amps
> that aren't normally used in audio circuitry, chances are he's given
> enough thought to it to use them properly, and to good advantage.
> That's what he does.

My thoughts exactly. 5 of the input channels have installed his mic preamp,
I am assuming he did the install, and apparently he offered some sort of mod
on the master module as well, so I am assuming he did this mod as well. (The
literature that came with the console included a Audio Upgrades catalog.)
Both the mods on the input channels and the master module involve more than
just swapping op amps, there are several other components swapped or added
too...but like I said in a previous post, although I can read the numbers on
a chip and I can tell the difference between a stock input channel PCB and
the modified ones, I am not an EE so my expertise ends with "There's
something different."

[Kurt Albershardt]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>> I'd definitely check out the modification situation. If it was Jim
>> Williams who acutally did the mod (or at least designed it if he
>> wasn't the one who put in the parts) even if it's based on op-amps
>> that aren't normally used in audio circuitry, chances are he's given
>> enough thought to it to use them properly, and to good advantage.
>> That's what he does.
>
>
> My thoughts exactly. 5 of the input channels have installed his mic preamp,
> I am assuming he did the install, and apparently he offered some sort of mod
> on the master module as well, so I am assuming he did this mod as well. (The
> literature that came with the console included a Audio Upgrades catalog.)
> Both the mods on the input channels and the master module involve more than
> just swapping op amps, there are several other components swapped or added
> too.

So call Jim up and ask him what to look for.

[Kurt Albershardt]

Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>> I'd definitely check out the modification situation. If it was Jim
>> Williams who acutally did the mod (or at least designed it if he
>> wasn't the one who put in the parts) even if it's based on op-amps
>> that aren't normally used in audio circuitry, chances are he's given
>> enough thought to it to use them properly, and to good advantage.
>> That's what he does.
>
>
> My thoughts exactly. 5 of the input channels have installed his mic preamp,
> I am assuming he did the install, and apparently he offered some sort of mod
> on the master module as well, so I am assuming he did this mod as well. (The
> literature that came with the console included a Audio Upgrades catalog.)
> Both the mods on the input channels and the master module involve more than
> just swapping op amps, there are several other components swapped or added
> too.

So call Jim up and ask him what to look for.

[Matt Macchiarolo]

I called him yesterday but caught him at a restaurant. I can wait till
Monday.

"Kurt Albershardt" > wrote in message
...
>
> So call Jim up and ask him what to look for.
>
>

[Matt Macchiarolo]

I called him yesterday but caught him at a restaurant. I can wait till
Monday.

"Kurt Albershardt" > wrote in message
...
>
> So call Jim up and ask him what to look for.
>
>

[Paul Stamler]

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...

> Haven't yet had a chance to measure the noise yet. But that is on the
to-do
> list. I did notice in when I threw up a quick mix on the console at a
> moderate volume level...when I stopped the tape machine, I could hear it.
So
> I pulled all the channel faders down thinking it was the cumulative noise
of
> each channel but it wasn't. The noise isn't in any of the aux or efx
busses,
> just the main l-r bus.

This is a dumb question, but I've gotten bagged by this. Are there any
returns coming to the main bus that might be turned up?

Peace,
Paul

[Paul Stamler]

"Matt Macchiarolo" > wrote in message
...

> Haven't yet had a chance to measure the noise yet. But that is on the
to-do
> list. I did notice in when I threw up a quick mix on the console at a
> moderate volume level...when I stopped the tape machine, I could hear it.
So
> I pulled all the channel faders down thinking it was the cumulative noise
of
> each channel but it wasn't. The noise isn't in any of the aux or efx
busses,
> just the main l-r bus.

This is a dumb question, but I've gotten bagged by this. Are there any
returns coming to the main bus that might be turned up?

Peace,
Paul

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> This is a dumb question, but I've gotten bagged by this. Are there any
> returns coming to the main bus that might be turned up?
>
> Peace,
> Paul

No, I thought of that but it;s still there even if all the returns are off.

[Matt Macchiarolo]

> This is a dumb question, but I've gotten bagged by this. Are there any
> returns coming to the main bus that might be turned up?
>
> Peace,
> Paul

No, I thought of that but it;s still there even if all the returns are off.

[skler]

Hi,

> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise). The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.

I wish I had a schematic for this mixer so I could give you a better
answer, but...

There are lower noise & higher performance parts to be sure, but there
are also have been some high dollar, high performance mixers that have
used exactly the same parts you describe. TL071's, 72's & NE5532,
NE5534s are popular basic building blocks capable of producing
excellent noise figures. I suspect it's the internal gain structure
&/or other aspects of the design and not the parts at issue. Though
you still may be able to improve by the retro-fit the Peavey tech
suggested.

There are some op amps out there with 2 to 3 nV / root Herts noise
figures... Maxim, Burr Brown, Analog Devices... Probably best to stick
with parts that others on this group or those with experience can
recommend, since the musical quality of op amps is definitely a
factor. Some op amps designed to be used in video circuits are
actually great for audio, but can be cost prohibitive. Personally, I
think Japan Radio Corp, Burr Brown & Signetics have some very musical
sounding op amps. Great specs don't always translate into great sound.
Sometimes you have to just try 'em out. Hopefully some folks on here
will give you some good advice on specific parts.

Most of the noise in mixers comes from the front end, the highest gain
section. So microphone preamplifiers are the contributor to most noise
problems. The trick in the design should be to get a low noise front
end and then operate well above the noise floor in successive gain
stages.

If you acquire the schematic & show it to a good tech & he could
research it & perhaps find some lower noise transistors to use in the
preamp stage. It is possible that the front end gain stages of your
mixer are based solely on op amps and do not have discrete transistor
preamps! If this is the case you *definitely* should try lower noise
parts in these stages!


Here's a simple idea for the adventurous:

Get a schematic and look at the power supply. If the split supply that
feeds the op amp stages is say around +/- 12 Volts or even +/- 15V,
you may be able to get improved performance by increasing the voltage
to say +/- 17 or even +/- 18 V. If the split supply is adjustable or
uses simple IC regulators it should be easy to modify or adjust.
This modification, if practical, can greatly increase head room. It
may or may not decrease noise depending on the circuit, but it's
relatively easy & shouldn't hurt anything in trying.


PS, the 741 is probably used for a metering circuit or signal light.

Skler
Austin, Tx

[skler]

Hi,

> Just got a new (old) mixing console, Peavey/AMR 2400, and there is a
> noticeable level of noise in the master module when I pull up the faders,
> even though there is no signal from any of the channels. I called Peavey's
> tech dept and they suggested replacing the op-amps in the master module, as
> they age they lose their tolerances and can cause noise (it sounds like
> white noise). The manual shows that it contains a bunch of 5532's, a few TL
> 074's, a few TL 072's, and a 741. I did a search at Digikey's website, and
> found that there seems to be many "versions" of each chip, each with a
> difference suffix to the chip number. I can physically replace the chips,
> but determining the right version is beyond my expertise.

I wish I had a schematic for this mixer so I could give you a better
answer, but...

There are lower noise & higher performance parts to be sure, but there
are also have been some high dollar, high performance mixers that have
used exactly the same parts you describe. TL071's, 72's & NE5532,
NE5534s are popular basic building blocks capable of producing
excellent noise figures. I suspect it's the internal gain structure
&/or other aspects of the design and not the parts at issue. Though
you still may be able to improve by the retro-fit the Peavey tech
suggested.

There are some op amps out there with 2 to 3 nV / root Herts noise
figures... Maxim, Burr Brown, Analog Devices... Probably best to stick
with parts that others on this group or those with experience can
recommend, since the musical quality of op amps is definitely a
factor. Some op amps designed to be used in video circuits are
actually great for audio, but can be cost prohibitive. Personally, I
think Japan Radio Corp, Burr Brown & Signetics have some very musical
sounding op amps. Great specs don't always translate into great sound.
Sometimes you have to just try 'em out. Hopefully some folks on here
will give you some good advice on specific parts.

Most of the noise in mixers comes from the front end, the highest gain
section. So microphone preamplifiers are the contributor to most noise
problems. The trick in the design should be to get a low noise front
end and then operate well above the noise floor in successive gain
stages.

If you acquire the schematic & show it to a good tech & he could
research it & perhaps find some lower noise transistors to use in the
preamp stage. It is possible that the front end gain stages of your
mixer are based solely on op amps and do not have discrete transistor
preamps! If this is the case you *definitely* should try lower noise
parts in these stages!


Here's a simple idea for the adventurous:

Get a schematic and look at the power supply. If the split supply that
feeds the op amp stages is say around +/- 12 Volts or even +/- 15V,
you may be able to get improved performance by increasing the voltage
to say +/- 17 or even +/- 18 V. If the split supply is adjustable or
uses simple IC regulators it should be easy to modify or adjust.
This modification, if practical, can greatly increase head room. It
may or may not decrease noise depending on the circuit, but it's
relatively easy & shouldn't hurt anything in trying.


PS, the 741 is probably used for a metering circuit or signal light.

Skler
Austin, Tx

[skler]

Oh, I forgot to mention...

It is possible for op amps to operate in a failture mode in which they
still pass signal, but they are very noisy and/or their gain is
altered, so you should definitely replace the op amps in the suspect
stage of your mixer, even if you just use the original parts!

Skler

[skler]

Oh, I forgot to mention...

It is possible for op amps to operate in a failture mode in which they
still pass signal, but they are very noisy and/or their gain is
altered, so you should definitely replace the op amps in the suspect
stage of your mixer, even if you just use the original parts!

Skler

[david]

In article >, Scott Dorsey
> wrote:

> Fletcher basically was driven off the group by the poor S/N and by his
> ISP's lousy news feed. He hasn't been here in ages. I miss him a lot.
> --scott



Scott,

I think the real reason Fletcher isn't here has to do with $. His
current gig online pays, and pretty good too.

Ya, he was reason enough to keep tabs on this newsgroup. Now this place
looks like Fallujah.





David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island


www.CelebrationSound.com

[david]

In article >, Scott Dorsey
> wrote:

> Fletcher basically was driven off the group by the poor S/N and by his
> ISP's lousy news feed. He hasn't been here in ages. I miss him a lot.
> --scott



Scott,

I think the real reason Fletcher isn't here has to do with $. His
current gig online pays, and pretty good too.

Ya, he was reason enough to keep tabs on this newsgroup. Now this place
looks like Fallujah.





David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island


www.CelebrationSound.com

[Bryson]

Phil Allison wrote:
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
>
>
>>>Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>>
>>Every group seems to have one.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.
>
> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
> thousands of know nothings.
>
>
>
>
>
> ........... Phil
>
>

Phil,
Why are you?

[Bryson]

Phil Allison wrote:
> "Matt Macchiarolo"
>
>
>>>Don't bother abour Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.
>>
>>Every group seems to have one.
>>
>
>
>
>
> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.
>
> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
> thousands of know nothings.
>
>
>
>
>
> ........... Phil
>
>

Phil,
Why are you?

[Geoff Wood]

"david" > wrote in message news:161120040155442790%

> I think the real reason Fletcher isn't here has to do with $. His
> current gig online pays, and pretty good too.
>
> Ya, he was reason enough to keep tabs on this newsgroup. Now this place
> looks like Fallujah.


Yeah, and he took no prisoners, just like a Marine.

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

"david" > wrote in message news:161120040155442790%

> I think the real reason Fletcher isn't here has to do with $. His
> current gig online pays, and pretty good too.
>
> Ya, he was reason enough to keep tabs on this newsgroup. Now this place
> looks like Fallujah.


Yeah, and he took no prisoners, just like a Marine.

geoff

[Arny Krueger]

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message

> "Matt Macchiarolo"

>>> Don't bother about Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.

>> Every group seems to have one.

> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.

> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
> thousands of know nothings.

Great job of misplaced priorities, Phil! The folks you damn here are among
the most productive on-topic posters this group has.

It's the Off-Topic trolls (names withheld to avoid inciting the guilty to
additional misbehavior) that have ruined this place.

[Arny Krueger]

"Phil Allison" > wrote in message

> "Matt Macchiarolo"

>>> Don't bother about Phil, he's our resident rodent / troll.

>> Every group seems to have one.

> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.

> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
> thousands of know nothings.

Great job of misplaced priorities, Phil! The folks you damn here are among
the most productive on-topic posters this group has.

It's the Off-Topic trolls (names withheld to avoid inciting the guilty to
additional misbehavior) that have ruined this place.

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger"
> "Phil Allison"
>> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.
>
>> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
>> thousands of know nothings.
>
>
> Great job of misplaced priorities, Phil! The folks you damn here are among
> the most productive on-topic posters this group has.


** As near inexhaustible sources of copious amounts of misinformation the
above trolls are Second to None.

As ever present, menacing threats to any person *daring* to post
technically factual information here the above trolls are the Grand Masters.

The above trolls also have a small army of acolytes and sycophants who
together form a pernicious infestation that chokes and ruins a public
information forum like this - then of course even worse trolls follow
in their footsteps ( ones everyone recognises as trolls ) much as do
cockroaches down a sewer.

As a posturing "One Trick Pony" with no insight into how damn little he
comprehends on practically any subject - Arny Krueger can find plenty of
like minded types here to keep him company.




............. Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Arny Krueger"
> "Phil Allison"
>> ** This NG consists of virtually 100 % trolls.
>
>> Trolls with names like Dorsey, Rivers, Cain, Ford, Shaw and a cast of
>> thousands of know nothings.
>
>
> Great job of misplaced priorities, Phil! The folks you damn here are among
> the most productive on-topic posters this group has.


** As near inexhaustible sources of copious amounts of misinformation the
above trolls are Second to None.

As ever present, menacing threats to any person *daring* to post
technically factual information here the above trolls are the Grand Masters.

The above trolls also have a small army of acolytes and sycophants who
together form a pernicious infestation that chokes and ruins a public
information forum like this - then of course even worse trolls follow
in their footsteps ( ones everyone recognises as trolls ) much as do
cockroaches down a sewer.

As a posturing "One Trick Pony" with no insight into how damn little he
comprehends on practically any subject - Arny Krueger can find plenty of
like minded types here to keep him company.




............. Phil

[Richard Crowley]

"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
> It's the Off-Topic trolls (names withheld to avoid inciting
> the guilty to additional misbehavior) that have ruined this place.

Thats why they invented killfiles (for both individuals and
for OT threads). Quite marvelous and effective noise-reduction.
Would that we had devices that good for audio!

[Richard Crowley]

"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
> It's the Off-Topic trolls (names withheld to avoid inciting
> the guilty to additional misbehavior) that have ruined this place.

Thats why they invented killfiles (for both individuals and
for OT threads). Quite marvelous and effective noise-reduction.
Would that we had devices that good for audio!

[Phil Allison]

"Richard Crowley"
> "Arny Krueger" wrote ...
>> It's the Off-Topic trolls (names withheld to avoid inciting
>> the guilty to additional misbehavior) that have ruined this place.
>
> Thats why they invented killfiles (for both individuals and
> for OT threads). Quite marvelous and effective noise-reduction.



** I bet they invented sand just so ostriches like you Crowley could stick
their heads in it.

Would never do to have your cherished prejudices challenged now would
it ???





............... Phil

[Phil Allison]

"Richard Crowley"
> "Arny Krueger" wrote ...
>> It's the Off-Topic trolls (names withheld to avoid inciting
>> the guilty to additional misbehavior) that have ruined this place.
>
> Thats why they invented killfiles (for both individuals and
> for OT threads). Quite marvelous and effective noise-reduction.



** I bet they invented sand just so ostriches like you Crowley could stick
their heads in it.

Would never do to have your cherished prejudices challenged now would
it ???





............... Phil