My experience with balanced through the preamp was a positive one
There have been some good posts on this as to why there is value in going balanced as well the contrary. Having gone to single ended some factors have improved due to upgraded components. Can't deny something was lost though.
Moving forward if I happen to revamp I'll be going back to an all balanced with each component being true balanced. Reduction of IMD and common mode noise reduction just lowers the noise floor. Let's the music through
There is just something about that blacker background that's seductive. JMO
|
OK folks, we can cease and desist on this post. Save your time.
|
tech-talk,
Have you considered that by posting as you have here in the forum, you are literally looking for a needle in a haystack?
Your post is asking why some companies don't offer XLR on their high end products. You ask that no one speculate. Twice.
So, really the only person or people you are asking to respond would be THE person or team member responsible for overall product development at an audio company that doesn't offer XLR who actually knows the reason they chose not to.
And you think that person or people are reading this message of yours in the forum and willing to share their decision matrix? I don't think so.
I suggest you'd be far better off posting in a companies forum if they had one, or getting direct communication from the company you wish had those options.
For example... if you had a question for Bryston, in the AudioCircle forum, there is a Bryston sub-group, and the key players in Bryston do participate in discussions. That sort of format is likely to yield answers that are not speculation, not a public forum like this. Just my 02.
|
I stand corrected atmosphere. I shouldn’t have thrown that statement out there that way. My mistake for stating it that way.
|
When we agree on which pin is hot so we can make adaptors. That's when.
|
So then I'm running a 5 meter RCA cable from my preamp to my amp, I compared the 5 meter RCA cable to a 1 meter RCA cable and didn't hear any difference.
|
@atmasphere
Bravo! Wonderfully stated!!
Pretty much every interconnect is balanced in my system. I try to limit my heavily shielded low capacitance RCA cables to 1 foot when possible; never exceeding 3 feet.
Not meaning to derail this thread, I’d be interested in your opinion of Dante sometime, and could it ever become part of the high end audiophile playing field someday (of course some high end manufacturers haven’t even stepped up to include balanced analog connections on their gear)? It looks like Dante is being used very successfully in the pro field.
|
Because your assumption that balanced is better is not correct.
If you’re saying, they should offer both, that is not without compromise. Simpler signal path is superior.
If the balanced connection adheres to AES48 then it is better in every way. If the connection does not support AES48 then its a crap-shoot!
If it is a short cable run then un-balanced is fine and the shorter the better.
This is a common myth. The advantage of a balanced connection is there even if the cable is only 6 inches long.
Some applications simply do not adhere to the concept of balanced signalling (i.e. phono cartridges), but do work well at maintaining an electrically consistent path from cartridge to phono stage.
FWIW all phono cartridges (with the exception of some older Decca cartridges which only have 3 pins) are the definition of a balanced source. That is why when run single-ended, a ground wire is included since the ground is independent of the source wiring and so will introduce a buzz if not grounded.
As for the "long run" cable scenario. my preamp is 18 feet away from my amps. I have been told by many sources this distance is nothing for an RCA cable. Now Hegel on the other hand, suggests the use of high quality XLR cables is the way to go. I have tried both and must say I hear no difference in sound. Tempest in a tea cup IMHO.
10 feet is pushing it for any RCA connection! Otherwise you can get into audible high frequency roll off depending on the input impedance that is being driven- the higher the impedance (tube amplifiers take note) the worse this problem is. For really pricy cables attempting to get around this problem, read on...
What really matters is if the audio equipment has a “true balanced” design. Meaning that there is identical circuits for the positive and negative signals. This means twice the parts and cost pretty much. Twice as many tubes or transistors and a higher current power supply to power it all.
This statement is often false. If the circuit is balanced differential there are not twice as many parts! For example any kind of equalization can be done in the differential domain using the same number of parts as a single-ended EQ circuit. The only place that requires duplicate (balanced) wiring is when the circuit is being processed by a volume control or being switched.
You don’t have to have balanced circuitry to run a balanced line properly. The venerable Ampex 351 tape electronics are entirely single-ended, using transformers at the input and output to receive and send balanced signals.
The advantage of running differential balanced internal circuitry is you get so much more immunity to power supply problems as any power supply noise is common mode so does not get amplified. This results in not only less noise but less intermodulations since power supply noise intermodulates with the signal due to non-linearities in the tube or transistor involved.
Internally balanced operation is also inherently lower distortion because even ordered harmonics are cancelled from stage to stage. Because distortion isn’t compounded as much thruout the circuit, you get a more transparent sound since distortion obscures detail.
Some will argue that the remaining distortion is odd ordered, but the ear treats the 3rd harmonic in much the same way that it does the 2nd (its innocuous) and its able to mask succeeding harmonics quite well. But when you look at the distortion spectra you see the succeeding harmonics dropping off at a faster rate than with a single-ended circuit. High end audio is really about getting as close to the sound of the music as possible so this is a real bonus!
Another enormous reason to go balanced is the interconnect cables. This is not all that hard to understand. In the old days before Robert Fulton founded the high end exotic cable industry (mid 1970s), the only way you could get signals from point A to B without the cable interacting with the signal was by using balanced lines. This is how microphone signals were able to travel in cables insulated with rubber and PVC and not get all messed up like you see in high end audio if the exotic materials are not used. We all have recordings that were done in this manner!
Put another way, in high end audio the technique has been to throw money at the cable problem and if you heard a difference then the money was deemed ’well spent’. But imagine an exotic cable system where the equipment that drives and receives the signal does all the heavy lifting, allowing the cable to be inexpensive with no downside. That’s the balanced line system, that’s why there is a standard for it (AES48 combined with low impedance operation) and that’s why its been used by the recording/broadcast industry as soon as it was figured out 70 years ago. Its simply more musical, more neutral.
Again, if you find yourself disagreeing with any of this, its probably because the equipment you heard didn’t support the standard. This throws out the baby with the bath. ...FWIW We were the first company making balanced line equipment for home stereo and it was really hard to get going with it because it was for home audio not pro audio. When we finally started seeing competitors jump in, we cringed seeing so many of them either ignore the standards or seemingly were ignorant of them. As a result we also started seeing high end audio balanced interconnect, which is really ridiculous: the whole point of balanced operation is to rid yourself of cable interactions (and ground loops)!! If you’ve ever auditioned interconnect cables and heard a difference you know what I’m talking about.
|
Most of the wires/cables between microphones and recording equipment of your most cherished recordings was done through XLR. Just saying
|
+1 for carlsbad
My single-ended preamp easily drives my 25' RCA interconnects to my mono blocks. Of course, they are quality cables & connectors.
From what I can gather, if the preamp (single ended) has a low output impedance it would/should be able to drive long runs of interconnecting cable. This simple fact will explain why some preamps are unable to do long IC runs. This does little to excite me to look for a balanced topology preamp to replace my current gem.
Sounds like bias harping to me. Good circuit execution etc. is not limited to balanced component design.
|
What really matters is if the audio equipment has a “true balanced” design. Meaning that there is identical circuits for the positive and negative signals. This means twice the parts and cost pretty much. Twice as many tubes or transistors ...
That’s not really true. A truly balanced amplifier commonly uses discrete op-amps in a differential configuration, so it doesn’t have twice the circuitry and parts count. Still, it will be more complex than a simple single-ended circuit.
|
Typically if the circuit is not balanced the XLR input comes in and the positive phase runs through the normal circuit and the negative phase is just run to ground through a resistor like 100K or whatever they’re input load is. Or as I mentioned above through a summing circuit like an IC or tube or even a transformer.
I heard him issues both ways from people. One has hum on RCA no matter what interconnect they try. Or even the opposite. I remember a couple guys had hum with balanced cables and tried different ones to no avail. Never could figure that one out.
P.S. It is not uncommon for the positive phase to be jumpered over from the input XLR jack to the RCA jack. No big deal as you only use one or the other and it’s just feeding the amplifier circuit.
|
@almandog,
Unless you are using the top tier McIntosh like the 2 boxes preamp, there is no benefit to balanced. Even though almost all Mac equipment has both balanced and unbalanced connectors, they are not truly balanced. If you look inside the unit, the balanced connectors are connected to the RCA connections as well. Like I said, only their very best amps and preamps are truly balanced.
I am willing to bet you had a problem with that particular RCA cable and if you replaced it with another RCA, the hum would have been gone as well. I got this information when I toured the McIntosh factory in 2019, right from the engineers mouth. They are there for convenience only.
|
This is a good thread on the subject.
I have an all McIntosh system and I was using RCA interconnect all along but I was always getting a Hum from my system. I tried everything but couldn't get rid of the Hum completely. Seeing that the McIntosh has XLR ins and outs I bought Mugami audio cables and Neutrik XLR connectors and made up some XLR interconnects. The Hum disappeared. The sound quality remains the same, I could hear no difference compared to when the RCA was in use except the Hum. Now I no more Hum issue.
That's my experience with both type of interconnects.
Mando.
|
What really matters is if the audio equipment has a “true balanced” design. Meaning that there is identical circuits for the positive and negative signals. This means twice the parts and cost pretty much. Twice as many tubes or transistors and a higher current power supply to power it all.
Many companies just add XLR jacks to their single-ended equipment and add an extra IC or transistors (if solid state) or extra tube/s (if tube) to take the signal from balanced to single-ended. All this does is add extra circuitry and actually (typically) degrade the sound. All your doing is adding extra parts in the signal path.
If the source component (CD player, DAC, etc), preamp, amplifier are truly balanced then I’ve always noticed an improvement in sound quality going with balanced cabling (XLR or whatever). No matter the length. Blacker background (because the +/- phases are canceling out noise and artifacts), improved imaging, fuller sound, improved dynamics and low level detail, bass, etc.
I know many will say if it’s a short length it doesn’t matter. It will make a difference in sound quality if the entire system is fully balanced. When I discovered how big an improvement true balanced made I custom built my entire system up with true balanced components. My DAC has dual D to A chips outputting R/L +/- (which is common now days) to the fully balanced tube preamp (twice as many tubes), to a full true balanced amplifier. The amp actually doesn’t even have RCA inputs because that would take and extra tube. One side of the amplification stage (a 6SN7 into two KT150’s) is fed by the positive signal and the other half of the amp (the other 6SN7 and two KT150’s) is fed by the negative signal. After the amplification by the tubes the signal is combined at the output transformer. This is “true balanced “ circuitry.
Equipment that uses single-ended circuitry and a chip/extra tube to balance the signal typically adds no improvement to the sound.
Even in the digital domain true balancing of the DAC’s makes a quieter, improved sound quality. I remember when Mike Moffat first designed his Theta Digital DAC processor and found that creating a +/- signal in the digital domain and feeding two DAC chips per channel produced a better sounding unit. Quieter, cleaner, less digital artifacts, more dynamic, etc. Four DAC chips and quad parts all the way out produced amazing sound quality. That was when people were still saying “If it’s digital it doesn’t matter, it’s just 1’s and 0’s”. The next step he added four fiber optic isolation IC’s between the digital processing board and the DAC board (decoupling grounds, etc) which further reduced noise and digital artifacts.
Most people in audio now know, Everything Matters!
Anyway that’s my two cents.
|
Unless you are going to reach out to the marketing and engineering department of every high end audio manufacturer that doesn’t offer balanced connections every answer you get is a speculation. The reason is going to be somewhat different for each company. So, I’m going to speculate and provide several potential reasons, some of which have already been mentioned.
1. The designer has determined that there is no significant sonic difference between single ended and balanced circuitry.
2. Balanced circuitry is more complicated and expensive to implement. It could also be that a designer’s preferred circuitry doesn’t lend itself to balanced operation. Why do it if you don’t believe it sounds any better?
3. The marketing department has determined that their target customer doesn’t feel that balanced circuitry is better. It could be a marketing decision.
4. Related to point #3, the marketing department has determined that the extra cost of adding balanced circuitry and connectors kicks the product into a different price bracket where they don’t want to compete. Remember, every extra dollar you spend on the manufactured unit multiplies into at least 4 extra dollars to the customer.
5. Also related to marketing, balanced circuitry is a branding strategy for several high end companies. There is a general perception that balanced connectors are better because they are used in professional audio. The target customers for these companies value the balanced feature and will pay more for it.
6. And finally, I can give you a non-speculative answer based on my own experience. I have a Krell KRC 2 preamp and a Krell KSA 300S amp. When I got the preamp recapped I tried hooking up my SACD player (which only has RCA connections) to my amp. I dug out the shorting pins from my audio parts drawer, installed them in the amp, and gave it a try. I got a persistent hum. I checked with my buddies on a Krell forum and they replied that it is simply not a good idea to try to run a KSA 300S using RCA cables. It was made to run balanced and it would be a hassle to try to track down the source of the hum. I also have a DAC with balanced outputs. I hooked it up to the amp and it worked perfectly. The balanced feature is a big marketing point for Krell and I saw firsthand that they are serious when they recommend using only balanced connections even when they provide RCA inputs. For the record, I have tried using RCA cables between my DAC and my preamp and I can’t hear any difference compared to using balanced cables.
If you decide to avoid speculation entirely and poll each manufacturer that only offers singe ended connections I would be interested in the results of your poll. I always prefer facts and evidence over speculation.
|
My tube amps are from Triode Audio of Japan. TRX-M845 mono blocks. I asked them directly what type of cables they use when setting up systems at major audio shows. My thought being they would use what makes their equipment sound the best. They responded only RCA cables are ever used, as as the amps are not balanced by design. That's good enough for me. As for the "long run" cable scenario. my preamp is 18 feet away from my amps. I have been told by many sources this distance is nothing for an RCA cable. Now Hegel on the other hand, suggests the use of high quality XLR cables is the way to go. I have tried both and must say I hear no difference in sound. Tempest in a tea cup IMHO.
|
Ayre’s Charlie Hanson was a big advocate of balanced connections. Ayre’s user manuals state that balanced connections are preferred. Of course Ayre’s components are fully balanced, so a balanced connection with them makes sense.
|
I only know me truly high end manufacturer who does’t - Spectral - and they d sign their system end to end - you need their cables! Boulder requires XLR , and Ayre includ s it, DCS, as well.
|
Andrew Robinson uses only RCA connections. He is not a big fan of XLR ....
|
Some of the best sounding components ever made use only RCA. The fact that a component has XLR does not mean it's "better" . My last preamp, Zesto Leto had a full set of both RCA and XLR inputs and outputs. Aside from the difference in gain it was hard to tell which format was being used. They sounded identical
|
The use of the XLR connector system has nothing at all to do with the application (electrical specification or the type of signal). Electrical signalling may be balanced or unbalanced or differential. It does not even specify the number of connector pins.
The assumption is that 3 pin connectors define the use of balanced signalling, with positive (pin 2) and negative (pin 3) being equal and opposite in polarity with respect to signal ground (pin 1), and symmetrical with identical phasing.
Some applications simply do not adhere to the concept of balanced signalling (i.e. phono cartridges), but do work well at maintaining an electrically consistent path from cartridge to phono stage. In fact, the use of coaxial connectors (i.e. RCA pin connectors, tip/sleeve, BNC et al), is fundamentally incorrect because it uses one of the signal-carrying conductors as the shield.
To sum it up, in the audio spectrum, the type of connector matters very little. The quality of connector matters a lot. The use of balanced electrical signalling, the use of differential signalling, for interconnects is preferred over unbalanced electrical signalling, but only where the signal origin is balanced (i.e. at the output stage).
|
|
My guess would be that equipment that is manufactured as truly balanced, would always have XLR connections. And all other equipment having balanced connectors are only fooling the buyer into thinking there will be an improvement in sound by using them? By using XLR cables into an unbalanced amp, does the signal not have to be processed one extra step?
|
@dreas
Are you referring to balanced signal paths between preamps/amplifiers? Digital components or just the use of that style of connector? There is a difference when it comes to the signal path (balanced/unbalanced) and there are other situations where unbalanced coaxial would be better as well.
If I were to offer the most simplified response it would be the difference between professional and consumer products- but that has also changed over the years.
|
Increased complexity, more real estate required on the back panel and reduced profits. I would always want to pay extra and have them rather than cheap out and wish I had them. Especially since I live in a noisy situation and need long lengths of cable.
|
What, we have 90 years where RCA connections have worked just fine and now you demand XLR connections?
|
Maybe contacting the specific manufacturer's marketing department would be of more help since we can only... speculate
Would the engineering department also potentially know why?
|
Yes, examples would be helpful so we can see where you want this discussion to go. Off the top of my head: Pass, darTZeel, Soulution, Levinson, Krell, FM Acoustics offer both balanced and XLR. D'Agostino offers only XLR, so that turns it around a bit.
Maybe contacting the specific manufacturer's marketing department would be of more help since we can only... speculate.
|
@carlsbad Yep what I thought and I agree sir.
|
@jerryg123 Yes, I'm speaking of those with their amp in the same room as their preamp.
|
This is an @atmasphere , question.
He was one of the first designers to offer equipment that used the AES 48 standard.
Long story short, designing equipment that not only offers XLR, but adheres to the AES standard, makes it challenging. Many offer XLR connectivity, but do not use the AES standard-which makes the XLR connection subject to cable influence.
Okay, I should probably back up even further.
The AES 48 standard insulates the cable from introducing 'cable artifacts'-or for a better phrase, 'cable sound'. This standard has been utilized by recording studios for decades. And, understandably so, considering that equipment is spaced over quite long distances.
So, when a manufacturer offers XLR/balanced, the equipment should adhere to the AES standard in order for the cable to introduce the minimal amount of 'coloration'.
Unfortunately, doing so makes it a bit of a design problem, albeit with additional cost.
Hopefully, Ralph(Atmasphere) will chime in.
Bob
|
|
Balanced is preferable for very long cable runs such as mono-block amplifiers that will be located next to speakers and away from the pre-amp and sources. Unless the component is truly balanced their is no point.
As @carlsbad said you are making assumptions. If it is a short cable run then un-balanced is fine and the shorter the better.
|
Because your assumption that balanced is better is not correct.
If you're saying, they should offer both, that is not without compromise. Simpler signal path is superior.
|
I personally think that most "higher end" audio products do provide balanced connections. At the same time, I don’t think they’re actually needed in all cases, and the manufacturer is probably saving some money by not providing them. On the other hand, some manufacturers may be actually losing out on some sales by not providing them. Educated audiophiles should already know what they’re looking for when shopping for audio gear. If balanced ins and outs are a priority for you, well then that may limit your choices. Some are actually slow to jump on the XLR bandwagon, and realize their benefits, as balanced audio has been in the pro field for decades already, to the point it’s almost old technology now. Next up is Dante (which is already being heavily used in the pro field).
|
