This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

TPA6120A2 old, new rev DS performance graph numbers don't agree

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TPA6120A2

TPA6120A2 2014 revised datasheet - graph # don't match earlier DS by an order of magnitude

the conversion to dB in various distortion performance plots doesn't jibe with the % distortion numbers in the earlier DS

the 2014 rev A comment is only that they were converted - not corrected - so one is wrong

unless the difference is the QFN eval board

if so then you really want to show both package's #s if you don't want to lose product sales

also drooping the IMD graph is a fail in a Audio product DS - how do you justify giving less info?

  • Hi JC1,

    We were getting a lot of requests for a part like the TPA6120A2 in a smaller package so we decided to release it in a QFN. As we started to evaluate the QFN version, it was clear that the performance was different than the SOIC specs per the datasheet. So we went back and looked at the SOIC package. To our surprise the QFN was slightly outperforming the SOIC and neither met the old datasheet. Unfortunately, no one is still around from the original development team but we were able to find the original test data. It looks like an error in a formula applied to the original data was based on an incorrect assumption. We feel strongly that a customer should be able to see the datasheet performance from an EVM and believe the new datasheet accurately reflects the performance of both parts.

    In spite of the error in the old datasheet, the TPA6120A2 is still a very good performing headphone amp. I have one sitting on my desk right now (the QFN) and I use it for all of my critical listening. 

    Best Regards,

    dave