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.

INA2128 or INA2134?

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: INA2134, INA2128, INA128, INA134, DRV134, INA137

Hello, I have a need to bring a signal into my circuit whilst preserving its fidelity as best as possible. It isn't audio, but it has the same sort of requirements as the very best audio might require, so an answer assuming an audio line input would be very useful; ie best noise and THD performance. If I don't have onerous common mode requirements, such as common mode outside the limits in the data sheet, is there really any reason not to use the instrumentation amplifier (INA2128) in preference to the audio differential receiver (INA2134)? Both datasheets refer to somewhat unrealistic source impedances of 0 for some of the test conditions, so it makes comparison tricky. Taking, as an example, the output noise voltage at 1kHz, the audio device quotes 52nV(sqrt(Hz)), whereas the instrumentation device for the same parameter quotes 8nV(sqrt(Hz)). Why would an audio engineer ever choose the audio device in place of the instrumentation amplifier with open gain resistor, especially if he was unsure of the source impedance of the input signal? Thanks for your time. Steve

  • Hello,

    The comparison is tricky because the INA134 is a difference amplifier and the INA128 is an instrumentation amplifier.

    While both can technically be used as an audio differential line receiver, the INA134 has much lower distortion and noise. This can be seen by comparing the noise of the INA128 at a gain of 1V/V with the noise of the INA134 and each device's THD graphs.

    Concerning the input impedance, the INA134 (and INA137) are intended to be used in conjunction with an audio line driver. For example, please look at Figure 29 of the DRV134 data sheet.
  • Thanks Pete - understood and accepted!