Those Awaiting EE Minimax DAC Opamp Rolling...

Also, in the paragraphs that follow the table, each of the BLACK entries lists a sigle in U1/2 and a dual in U6/7, which are the reversed positions, yet these entries are in BLACK, indicating that a dual was used in U1/2 and a single in U6/7.
Unless I'm missing something (and that's surely possible!), the article seems to be full of mistakes.

-Mike

I just did a quick read-through and my initial comments:

Thanks for taking the time to try these things out and write it up.

You say "For example, the red in the first row means you will reverse the order, such that the double AD797 would go into locations U1 and U2, and the single OPA627 set would go into locations U6 and U7!" The doubles are supposed to go into U1/2 and the singles in U6/7, so I think you crossed up the U1/2 vs. U6/7 in that statement.

Also, when a single is used in the "wrong" U1/2 positions, the solid state output doesn't work, correct? So why even mention what op-amps are placed in U6/7?

Also, you state "(IN RED)U1/U2 OPA827 (dual) and U6/U7 OPA2604 (single)(END RED) In the previous two, and now in this example, the Opamp in the U1/U2 positions has been the OPA827 and has yielded excellent results." Since this entry is in RED, this means that the single and duals are swapped, correct? So why do you say that the dual is in U1/2 and the single is in U6/7, which is actually the correct positioning.

I'll give the article a good going over tonite, but these are the first things that jumped out at me on first read through.

Thanks again for your efforts. I think some of the info in the article may not be what you intended to convey, though.

And, according to the table, your final selection of OPA2604 in U1/2 and AD797 in U6/7 was not indicated as having been evaluated. (No "X" in the table)

Still based on a quick perusal - please let me know if/how I'm mininterpreting the info in the article.

Thanks

-Mike