• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Balanced vs Unbalanced For Discussion

Over time and in the process of upgrading gear, I've gradually acquired a system which has both balanced and unbalanced connections built into every piece of gear (except a few sources like some TTs and cassette decks), and most of them are fully internally balanced. I've tried connections both ways, and concluded the following, at least in my situation:

(1) IF your entire chain offers balanced circuitry and connections, then go balanced XLR all the way. I can, for example, put a CD in a Denon or Pioneer player with balanced out (I have both), or a cassette into a NAK so equipped (my ZX-9 qualifies) into a Counterpoint line stage with balanced in/outs, to a pair of Counterpoint amps or Yamaha amps with balanced in/outs. Doing this entire chain with good-quality balanced cables (either various DIY or Mogami/Neutrik) results in the best overall sound, despite the theoretical introduction of additional balancing components to the circuitry.

I'm not sure why this is, but it may be that other gear in the environment, such as computers, a wireless router, and a plasma screen TV, are contributing low-level noise that the balanced connections help keep out of what I'm hearing. Or it may be the connectors themselves, as RCA connectors are inherently poor, obsolete technology that we are only stuck with for historical reasons. For whatever reason, going all balanced XLR sounds best in my system. But NOTE that this system has 100 percent balanced connectors throughout the chain. YMMV, especially if you are trying to mix-and-match connection types.

(2) As soon as you introduce an unbalanced connection into the chain, things can change. For example, if I'm playing records from the GT-2000, which does not have balanced connections, I have to be careful not to put my computer too close to it. The unbalanced cables, despite internal shielding, can pick up some of the noise. Perhaps that is also reflective of the very low-level signal going through them. Or maybe it's the cartridge or something else picking it up; all I know is that I need to keep the computer separated from the TT area.

(3) Even with balanced cables, the exact cables you use can affect the sound. (Yes, cables can and do make a difference, at least sometimes). I made several sets of cables using different types of microphone and coaxial cables and different connectors (Neutriks and some Japanese ones). I was lucky to pick up a bunch of different quality cables from a government surplus place, including some from actual studio applications, which gave me the luxury of being able to do this at low cost. Although the differences were more subtle than most, there were clearly reproducible differences between them.

(4) As much as possible, stick with ONE type of interconnect cable throughout. That is, match left and right channels AND match the cables used between source and pre and between pre and power amps. Mixing and matching different types of cables almost always has a negative effect on the sound. My suspicion is that each cable subtracts a different area of the sound, and additive subtractions (a nice oxymoron, huh?! :D) result in loss of overall sound quality. Of course, any difference between the right and left sides will have a negative impact on the sound stage, too. Find which type of cable best suits your ears, and use it throughout. {Possible exception: when gear used in different stages has seriously different impedance matching issues, and you are using cables to help adjust for that.}
 
Arkay... Thank you for the interesting read. This is what I was hoping for, a friendly discussion regarding the different connections.

I have three Emotiva components that has both balanced and unbalanced connections, a preamp and both monoblock amps, which is why I am interested in balanced connections. There has to be a reason why the manufacturer made the components with both connections. Emotiva is not consider high end audio and it's affordable components.

The more I read about balanced and unbalanced, the more I am considering. I can do it without spending an enormous amount of money.

Please keep the discussion going! :music:
 
4Play said:
To those who are still in the dark as to what I am wanting to do, check this out from Emotiva.
Click to expand...

That's a device for patching a single balanced output to two balanced inputs. Where would you be patching a device's output to two inputs? Do you have two amps driven by one preamp?

Otto
 
In general, where there is a choice between connecting your equipment balanced or unbalanced, it's better to go with a balanced connection. This should be distinguished, however, from the situation where the device at one end of a connection supports either balanced or unbalanced connection, while the other device supports unbalanced (usually through "RCA" connectors) connection only. In such a case, it's almost always better to hook your equipment up unbalanced to unbalanced, rather than try to rig a balanced-to-unbalanced connection.
 
Ok....in general I think that's a pretty safe quote/statement that I'd agree with. An exception might be in the case of a VERY long run I'd consider converting unbalanced to balanced and back again if necessary.

However, still confused about where the splitter you linked to comes into play?
 
Certainly, there is little likelihood of harm to using balanced connections where that is an option provided for on both units. It will probably be more robust, though a significant difference in audio quality is unlikely in a home audio setting, unless cable runs are long.

Admittedly, my experience is more with pro audio than home gear, but I've more often encountered the situation where I'm using several pieces of gear, some of which are designed for unbalanced operation while others are designed for balanced operation and none have separate connections for both types. In that case, unless cable runs are long, it's generally just a question of how to properly unbalance the balanced connection, and this is typically done in the patchbay, for convenience, but can be done by proper construction of dedicated cables.

For balanced inputs and most transformer balanced outputs (though there are exceptions), it's a simple matter of tying the minus leg of the balanced connection to ground, by using a TS plug in a TRS patchbay jack wired to the balanced connection, or with a dedicated, unbalanced cable with a properly wired balanced connector on one end that ties the minus leg to ground.

For outputs balanced with simple active electronics (one leg runs through an extra inverting amp), it's usually best to float the minus leg, by using an unbalanced patch cord with one TRS plug with no connection to the R connection, or a dedicated unbalanced cable wired with one balanced connector wired in that fashion. I have a fairly large cohort of patch cables I made in this fashion. For active, servo-balanced outputs, it's usually OK to tie the minus leg to ground, the same as for most transformer balanced outputs.

I hope that helps.

Otto
 
The tutorial is OK, but I have a disagreement with it regarding hot and neutral. This is correct if you are running a 2 wire system, unbalanced, with a separate shield, which is often a very good choice. But if you are running a balanced system, there is no 'hot' and 'neutral'. Both inner conductors are 'hot' with regard to the shield and there is no neutral. I would call them 'A' and 'B' or something like that. Often for microphones, or RF antennas, a balun transformer (balanced input, unbalanced output) which is connected so that that signals "A" and "B" are additive and a neutral is derived at the balun's secondary winding. Else it is derived inside the electronics input stage, usually but not always at the chassis ground, depending on noise conditions.

This is just to clarify the tutorial for those still learning.
 
The balanced wires are commonly referred to as "hot" and "cold" or "+" and "-", meaning hot / "+" = normal signal, cold / "-" = inverted signal. Balanced audio does not depend on the shield at all for conduction of the signal.

In an unbalanced connection, unless the shield is totally floating, it's connected to return at one or both ends. Connecting at one end only is somewhat of a common thing to do in audio but I think the merits of that are debated.

Here is an interesting read from Blue Jeans Cable regarding hum rejection in cables for unbalanced audio: http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/humrejection.htm

Here's the punch line in that regard -

... For this last cable we chose Belden 1800F, an excellent balanced audio cable with a "french braid" shield--two spiral shields, wound in opposite directions and interwoven. We wired it in what seems to be the most common configuration used in audiophile circles--one wire of the twisted pair to the center of the RCA plug, one to the outer ring, and the shield attached to the outer ring but only at the "source" end of the cable. ...

The 1800F performed miserably, which was no particular surprise. First, it isn't a coaxial cable and therefore isn't well-suited for use in an unbalanced circuit. Second, it was wired in a manner which, though popular with some users, makes no apparent electrical sense. None of this should be held against 1800F, which, when attached properly to balanced connectors and used in a balanced circuit, is a truly superb cable.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Couple other things to consider:

Like a poster above noted, balanced (wrt impedance) is only half the battle. The bigger benefit is from differential signal amplifiers at the receive end, which cancel common mode interference.

(The use of balanced as common terminology is akin to phase reversal = polarity reversal in speaker connections, but not crossover design... Perfectly OK as long as we all know what we're discussing.)

Pro gear uses balanced topology at +4 dBm. Hif-fi is unbalanced -10 dBm. Equal interference on each line has an unequal effect on the signal.

There was also a comment above stating that pro equipment mixes balanced and unbalanced signal types. I would say that's the very definition of semi-pro gear. But that's 'cause I'm old. :)

And to wrap up, there was also a statement that certain gear was "fully internally balanced" -- not just the I/O sections. I'd be interested in checking out that gear, and its schematics. Sounds interesting.

Oh, and Happy New Year.
Chip
 
Chip Chester said:
And to wrap up, there was also a statement that certain gear was "fully internally balanced" -- not just the I/O sections. I'd be interested in checking out that gear, and its schematics. Sounds interesting.
Click to expand...

A few very nice (read expensive) brands do this. But the thing to remember, is not only does this mean you're doubling up the parts count (that's twice as expensive if you're a bean counter), but you also have to carefully match each and every component! Now....that means much more than double the price. Any amount of mismatch and you've added distortion...not lessened it.

Now wait....don't forget.....channel balance is also critical to the best of best performance for soundstage and image depth. So you aren't just needing to match just a pair of components. No.... FOUR matched! Nowwww....what's that adding machine rattling sound I'm hearing????

Done well is it effective and a good thing? Sure...absolutely. Just have to balance this against the cost. What's it worth to ya....?

EV3
 
Chip Chester said:
Pro gear uses balanced topology at +4 dBm. Hif-fi is unbalanced -10 dBm. Equal interference on each line has an unequal effect on the signal.

There was also a comment above stating that pro equipment mixes balanced and unbalanced signal types. I would say that's the very definition of semi-pro gear. But that's 'cause I'm old. :)
Click to expand...

Of course, you can't make an absolute rule about such things. The very best pro tape machines ever, in my opinion, were made by John Stephens. His machines used custom made electronics components and unbalanced I/O running at a nominal +4 level. This saved a lot of cost, space and weight and helped him have considerable success selling machines not only for studio use, but portable and remote truck use.

Otto
 
ofajen said:
Of course, you can't make an absolute rule about such things. The very best pro tape machines ever, in my opinion, were made by John Stephens. His machines used custom made electronics components and unbalanced I/O running at a nominal +4 level. This saved a lot of cost, space and weight and helped him have considerable success selling machines not only for studio use, but portable and remote truck use.

Otto
Click to expand...

Yes, some of the finest mixing boards in the world have unbalanced patch points somewhere in the chain. For example on the old SSL and MCI, the Line Input and Line Output were balanced, but all other patch points were +4 Unbalanced.

If EVERY input and output on the entire console had to be balanced, it would have doubled or tripled the cost and weight of the console. (Not necessarily true these days with the progress of transformerless circuitry.)
 
I can run Balance/XLR from CDP/DAC to Pre to Amp and I do... But I have also tried unbalanced. Honestly I could not hear a difference. Altho cables are short
 
IF all your components have true balanced connections use them. IF the device sending signal has balanced and unbalanced, AND the receiving device has only unbalanced, use unbalanced.

any conversion to unbalanced defeats the purpose of balanced connections.

As said before, said component needs to be wired internally for balanced connections for you to see a benefit.

I have two amplifiers that are fully balanced internally, and they both recieve hundred foot + balanced signals from my sound cards that are also balanced outputs.

Balanced connections are mostly designed to shield cables from rf interferance, and signal loss over distances. If most of your gear does NOT have balanced connections(and associated wiring internally), you are wasting your time.
 
I've done recording in a very RF noisy environment (FM station transmitter close but I dunno where) with a fairly long run (a couple hundred feet) between mics and unbalanced recorder Teac A1200s. I used balun xformers with phone jack inputs directly to the Teac. I picked up no discernible noise in the recording of a professional flutist's recital; he didn't complain later either. But when I experimented with different connections at the same time, I got lots of FM signal. That was a really old building with who knows what kind of grounding/neutral system (Crouse College of Music at Syracuse University).

Purpose of twisted shielded pair is to pick up EMI/RF noise escaping the shield and to cancel it out in the electronics of the input state - both of the twisted pair wires pick up the same interference which is cancelled out by the differential input. There is an even better way than just unbalanced connections, for specialized applications, not usually audio. Where I can control and limit the noise environment, I have no need for balanced connections.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom