Balanced XLR vs RCA for phono stage

In your case, having high quality RCA, I presume not having any existing problem, there is no advantage.

My limited XLR experiences:

I tried 30 lf run, no improvement, because I didn’t have a problem to solve, no interference potential/realities.

Short runs in home audio systems (no mics, mixers, eq ...), where no problem exists, make no logical sense regarding the XLR’s different design/interference resistance, yet I tried short 6’ XLR runs.

In one case (not all cases): two advantages, not sound quality improvements.

a. XLR are locking connectors, so movement of other cables will not inadvertently disturb XLR’s.

Note: I converted all my RCA’s to LOCKING connectors, that problem’s gone. However, heavy RCA cables, locked connector or not, can be a lot of weight pulling down on the less sturdy RCA jacks. One set of my rca jacks is beginning to feel less than solid, I will be taking the cover off, checking them out, to prevent real trouble.

b. XLR from my SACD player sends a slight increase in volume compared to it’s RCA output. Is it the cable, or is it the player’s output? In any case, use of XLR from that unit is yielding a slight volume increase.

Suppose you have a progressively noisy volume control like I had on a prior 60’s receiver (don’t go past 11), a slight increase of incoming volume might help keep the noisy volume control a bit lower/less noise.

elliottbnewcombjr

... Short runs in home audio systems (no mics, mixers, eq ...), where no problem exists, make no logical sense ...

Many components that are differentially balanced yield 6 dB more gain in balanced configuration; or, you could see that as gaining 6 dB in s/n. So depending on the equipment, there can be very much to gain by using XLR connections.

@cleeds From the Goldnote manual: (Output specs) Unbalanced RCA @ 2V and balanced XLR @ 4V

The specs on their website show +12dB for the balanced output.

To your point, that seems like a lot of gain or s/n.

If the PH-10 is truly balanced AES48, not doubting it as Gold Note is a quality designer and builder. This really falls into the domain of a fellow like Mr Ralph @atmasphere as he has posted several times on this subject. 

@macg19 Wrote:

I have no clue what the pros and cons are for balanced XLR vs. single ended RCA, other than XLR is preferred for long runs.

See article below:

Mike

https://www.ranecommercial.com/kb_article.php?article=2107

I will echo looking at Ralph Karsten's posts (@atmasphere).

His website (once again, Atmasphere) gives some great information, too.

Plus, he is a really nice guy.

Bob

cleeds

thanks for the specs of XLR volume increase. That amount of stronger signal strength is significant.

That was the 2nd advantage I noted in my original post, but mine was 'stronger signal' without specifics. I tried XLR/RCA with other components, extra volume was not apparent.

Therefore, can you get specifics for OP's specific unit, and then predict signal strength?

XLR from my SACD player sends a slight increase in volume compared to it’s RCA output. Is it the cable, or is it the player’s output? In any case, use of XLR from that unit is yielding a slight volume increase.

@macg19 When you see an increase like this by going balanced, its a sign that the source (in this case) does not support the balanced standard. If it did, the volume would be unchanged. The reason this happens is because to execute a balanced output, all the manufacturer of the SACD player did was add a 2nd output (since XLR connections have a non-inverted and inverted output) out of phase with the first. This doubled the output voltage.

In a true balanced line situation, the inverted output is generated with respect to the non-inverted output and vice versa, rather than ground.

@atmasphere thanks for the info. In my case, the GoldNote phono stage appears to be a true balanced output that is rated in their specs as follows

“Unbalanced RCA @ 2V and balanced XLR @ 4V” 

also “Balanced Output +12dB” (compared to RCA)

Does that sound like a good implementation of a Balanced output?

I am pretty sure the int- amp, BAT VK 3500 is properly designed for balanced input.

Thoughts?

atmasphere

In a true balanced line situation, the inverted output is generated with respect to the non-inverted output and vice versa, rather than ground.

With all due respect to Ralph, I am going to quibble with this definition. There's more than one way to design a balanced circuit and operational amplifiers have long been used to generate both halves of the signal. There are advantages to the AES48 standard, but I don't think it's accurate to say that only amplifiers meeting the standard are "truly balanced."

By way of example, most (if not all) ARC amplifiers are differentially balanced yet don't comply with AES48. To claim that all ARC did to achieve balanced outputs is "add a 2nd output ... out of phase with the first" really doesn't accurately describe the amplifier's circuit.

macg19 OP

you could buy a pair of XLR from a source that allows returns, try/keep/return

@elliottbnewcombjr I've ordered the same Zavfino Fusion cable but in XLR - it should be a good (fair) comparison. I'm away this week so won't get to try them until Sunday, will report back.

Thanks all for the feedback.

There are advantages to the AES48 standard, but I don't think it's accurate to say that only amplifiers meeting the standard are "truly balanced."

By way of example, most (if not all) ARC amplifiers are differentially balanced yet don't comply with AES48. To claim that all ARC did to achieve balanced outputs is "add a 2nd output ... out of phase with the first" really doesn't accurately describe the amplifier's circuit.

@cleeds You're correct. However I never said that an amp or preamp that didn't meet AES48 couldn't be balanced. In high end audio, there's quite a lot of true balanced product that does not support the standard. Nor did I say anything about ARC doing what you mention above, although in at least one case that is precisely what they did.

In the quote above there is a bit of nuance. When you have two outputs that are simply inverted WRT each other, one output might be ever so slightly different amplitude or phase shifted WRT to the other. In a proper balanced line cable, this can't happen. This might be easier to understand if you think about a simple output transformer with only 2 output wires, driving pin 2 and pin 3 with no connection at all to pin 1 (which is chassis ground).

@macg19 Without knowing more about the circuit I can't say. However the doubling of output voltage suggests that it does not support AES48.

@atmasphere Thanks Ralph. I've asked Goldnote and BAT to weigh in but I'm trying out an XLR cable regardless.

@atmasphere Wrote:

This might be easier to understand if you think about a simple output transformer with only 2 output wires, driving pin 2 and pin 3 with no connection at all to pin 1 (which is chassis ground).

@cleeds,

The diagram below shows that!

Mike

The Absolute Best Right Way To Do It

The method specified by AES48 is to use balanced lines and tie the cable shield to the metal chassis (right where it enters the chassis) at both ends of the cable.

Figure 1a. The right way to do it.

I think it remains debatable that using a balanced circuit consistent with AES48 is the "absolute best right way to do it." That's why there are so many excellent components (such as the ARC that I mentioned) that use operational amp circuits to generate both halves of the signal.

The middle diagram matches the Zavfino XLR cable so if BAT and Goldnote got it right too, I should be good.

Thanks for posting.

High end audio designers are aware of standards. They will follow them when it results in the best sound. Frequently standards have large compromises embedded in them and may not be worth following to achieve the best result. There are always trade-offs.

Another thought (rhetorical question)...given the benefits of XLR in pro audio over long distances, why would high-end home audio designers bother implementing XLR if there was no sonic benefit over relatively short distances?

@macg19 Wrote:

The middle diagram matches the Zavfino XLR cable so if BAT and Goldnote got it right too, I should be good.

Thanks for posting.

The diagram came from the article in my first post above.

@macg19 Wrote:

Another thought (rhetorical question)...given the benefits of XLR in pro audio over long distances, why would high-end home audio designers bother implementing XLR if there was no sonic benefit over relatively short distances?

See article below:

Mike

http://www.atma-sphere.com/en/resource-why-balanced.html

@ditusa thanks - missed the first article, will read both this afternoon.

GoldNote said they are AES compliant 

@ditusa the article from Ralph was interesting and answers the question I asked about the benefits of XLR in home audio. Comments about cable auditioning were also interesting.

Comparing the same cable RCA vs XLR may also be interesting.

macg19

GoldNote said they are AES compliant 

That is very interesting, and doesn't seem to be consistent with the specs you quoted:

Unbalanced RCA @ 2V and balanced XLR @ 4V

I'm not familiar with this component so I can only say that I'm puzzled.

I just have to comment on the article’s introduction: “…continual and perpetual difficulty of hooking up audio equipment without suffering through all sorts of bizarre noises, hums, buzzes, whistles, etc….”.

In forty years of using single ended interconnects I have never experienced any of these symptoms, ever. I tested dozens of interconnects and components over that time.

I’m not refuting the paper. I’m just saying it is overstating the problem.

I went through a major upgrade a few years ago and did an A/B comparison on my audio equipment and found virtually no sonic benefit, but the cost was 2x to go to XLR. So for me that was $5K —> $10K. I had to think long and hard about spending $5K for no sonic improvement. In the end, I went ahead and did it. It gives me peace of mind, and XLR are becoming much more common… and I can afford it. if I was younger and was stretching to get the very best components I could afford… I would have just stuck with RCA… and upgraded when I could afford it.

@ghdprentice the reference was pro audio, long run mic cables etc.

Thanks. Then a completely different application and not relevant.

Keep it simple:

Ultra-low capacitance but shielded RCA terminated cables, the shorter, the better - never longer than one meter. And an external chassis ground cable, as heavy as practical for minimal resistance at the ground plane.
Anything else would be wasteful and unnecessary, and most likely, inferior.

Marc Stager
Stager Silver Solids Pure Silver High-End Audio Cables

Ultra-low capacitance but shielded RCA terminated cables, the shorter, the better - never longer than one meter. And an external chassis ground cable, as heavy as practical for minimal resistance at the ground plane.
Anything else would be wasteful and unnecessary, and most likely, inferior.

@stager Without any consideration for my components, cables, or their proximity to each other, this statement, especially "wasteful and unnecessary, and most likely, inferior", is nonsense. (and if true, why do you sell XLR cables?)

I did install a same brand/model XLR interconnect a few days ago.

It took about 10 seconds for me to know the XLR's were staying.

The increased gain was significant, but not like increasing the cart gain, which I did not like at all. For sure there was also a s/n benefit.

I was able to a/b test XLR and RCA at the same time, and yes I adjusted the amp gain to account for louder is better.

What blew me (and my wife) away, was the change in presence / imaging / holography.  

It was like getting a new cart/PS and amp all at once. 

Was it poor implementation of the single ended circuits in the Goldnote and/or BAT?

Or phenomenal implementation of their balanced circuits?

Don't know, don't care.

Best $360 I ever spent in audio. 

macg19

I did install a same brand/model XLR interconnect a few days ago. It took about 10 seconds for me to know the XLR's were staying. The increased gain was significant ... there was also a s/n benefit ... What blew me (and my wife) away, was the change in presence / imaging / holography ...

Good for you for ignoring the naysayers and finding out for yourself. I've found components that are truly balanced usually sound best when connected in a balanced configuration for the same reasons you note.

I've found that BAT gear sounds better using balanced connections myself.  Glad it worked out for you.

@tko956 thank you

Using balanced XLR connections in audio setups can offer several advantages over single-ended RCA connections, even for relatively short cable runs. However, the specific benefits you'll gain can depend on various factors, including the quality of your equipment and the listening environment. Here's a breakdown of the pros and cons of balanced XLR vs. single-ended RCA connections and whether it's worth getting an XLR cable for your setup:

Pros of Balanced XLR Connections:

1. Noise Rejection: Balanced XLR cables use two conductors and a ground, with one conductor carrying the inverted (phase-flipped) audio signal. This configuration allows for common-mode noise rejection, meaning any interference that affects both conductors is canceled out. This makes XLR connections more resistant to noise and interference.

2. Improved Signal Integrity: The noise rejection capabilities of XLR cables can result in cleaner and more accurate audio transmission. This can lead to improved audio quality, especially in high-end audio systems.

3. Greater Signal Strength: XLR connections typically have higher voltage levels, which can result in better signal strength over long cable runs. While your setup may not have long cable runs, this increased signal strength can still benefit signal quality.

4. Better Grounding: XLR connections provide a more secure ground connection, which can be beneficial in reducing ground loop issues and hum in your system.

Cons of Balanced XLR Connections:

1. Equipment Compatibility: To take full advantage of balanced XLR connections, both your source component (Goldnote PS-10) and your amplification component (BAT VK 3500) must support balanced XLR connections. If one of them does not, you won't be able to use XLR connections effectively.

2. Cost: In some cases, XLR cables and equipment may be more expensive than their single-ended counterparts. However, the price difference can vary depending on the brand and specific models.

Should You Get an XLR Cable for Your Setup?

Given that your BAT VK 3500 has balanced inputs, and your Goldnote PS-10 offers a balanced output, there are potential benefits to using balanced XLR connections, even for a relatively short cable run of 1.5 meters. These benefits include reduced noise and potentially improved signal integrity.

While your existing Zavfino Fusion RCA cable is likely of good quality, if you're interested in exploring the advantages of balanced XLR connections, you could consider getting the same Zavfino Fusion cable but terminated with XLR connectors. This would allow you to compare the performance between the two cable types and determine whether you notice a significant improvement in your audio quality.

Ultimately, whether the investment in a balanced XLR cable is worthwhile depends on your listening preferences and how discerning your ears are. If you appreciate cleaner, more pristine audio and are interested in the technical benefits of XLR connections, it may be a worthwhile upgrade. However, it's always a good idea to audition the cables in your specific setup to determine whether the difference in sound quality justifies the expense.

@tokushi 

Nice write up.

ghdprentice

Nice write up.

It hurts me to be the one to tell you, @ghdprentice, but user @tokushi is AI. It's pretty obvious.

@cleeds @ghdprentice AI, that makes sense now. @tokushi  completely ignored details in my OP, and that I had already moved forward and a/b tested same brand/model cables and posted my opinion.