Thanks Anatech. I've had only two balanced systems thus far. One is my PC based system, which consists of an Emu 1212M out to M-Audio BX5 speakers (soon to be KRK RP8s) and the detail is unbelievable. I'm also running ASIO through Fb2k. However, nearfield listening may be the reason.
The other was an old mobile audio system based on a Denon (DC1000) head unit which had balanced outputs to Zapco amps. This was less than an ideal listening envieronment of course, but the sue of balanced runs in such a situation makes complete sense.
My actual concern is that to buy a "pro" amop, you'll need to use them in a less than ideal setyup, because they were really designed to run balanced, and removing that differential signal and thus raising the noise floor can't be beneficial. Though, it may be inaudible.
The other was an old mobile audio system based on a Denon (DC1000) head unit which had balanced outputs to Zapco amps. This was less than an ideal listening envieronment of course, but the sue of balanced runs in such a situation makes complete sense.
My actual concern is that to buy a "pro" amop, you'll need to use them in a less than ideal setyup, because they were really designed to run balanced, and removing that differential signal and thus raising the noise floor can't be beneficial. Though, it may be inaudible.
The more I read, the more I wonder why "audiophile" gear doesn't have balanced i/o...
And, personally, if I'm setting up a large/high volume HT room, the selection that will influence the sound the LEAST will be the amplifier choice, as long as they can produce enough wattage to run the speakers. The thing I'm designing right now will have a fan-cooled stack, with active equalization.
And, personally, if I'm setting up a large/high volume HT room, the selection that will influence the sound the LEAST will be the amplifier choice, as long as they can produce enough wattage to run the speakers. The thing I'm designing right now will have a fan-cooled stack, with active equalization.
Modern pro amps are "quasi-floating," I believe. If I understand it correct it means they have the RF rejection without the 6 db extra headroom.
People I have talked with in pro audio cannot see any use for balanced gear in a home audio set-up. Neither can I, save for phono preamps. The S/PDIF is often used instead of the AES-EBU in studios. The S/PDIF has some feature the AES-EBU doesn't have. Somebody here might know more.
People I have talked with in pro audio cannot see any use for balanced gear in a home audio set-up. Neither can I, save for phono preamps. The S/PDIF is often used instead of the AES-EBU in studios. The S/PDIF has some feature the AES-EBU doesn't have. Somebody here might know more.
Hi phn,
Keep in mind the following:
1. Some balanced / unbalanced equipment (most really) use a converter circuit. That's two more stages in the signal path. Are you sure that is worth it. (Not counting the buffer to feed the converter)
2. Many converter circuits have gain inaccuacies. Bye bye channel balance. The other large issue is, are they complimentary circuits? Out gets +6 dB, in should lose the 6 dB. This is not always the case.
3. It takes very little to unbalance the line and kill the CMRR. That is the only time I would implement the balanced connection - save for phono cartridges. (same reason actually)
I once had to put a small recording studio back to -10 dBV to solve many issues (noise was one). On RCA 's the problems went away. This was a two floor facility mixing audio and video with digital sources as well.
So each situation needs to be evaluated on it's own. Some solutions are not always automatically the best.
-Chris
The XLR is a superior connector, but there is nothing wrong with a good RCA once it's plugged in. I'm not sure there is an advantage in a short run.
Keep in mind the following:
1. Some balanced / unbalanced equipment (most really) use a converter circuit. That's two more stages in the signal path. Are you sure that is worth it. (Not counting the buffer to feed the converter)
2. Many converter circuits have gain inaccuacies. Bye bye channel balance. The other large issue is, are they complimentary circuits? Out gets +6 dB, in should lose the 6 dB. This is not always the case.
3. It takes very little to unbalance the line and kill the CMRR. That is the only time I would implement the balanced connection - save for phono cartridges. (same reason actually)
I once had to put a small recording studio back to -10 dBV to solve many issues (noise was one). On RCA 's the problems went away. This was a two floor facility mixing audio and video with digital sources as well.
So each situation needs to be evaluated on it's own. Some solutions are not always automatically the best.
-Chris
anatech said:
Amen to that, brother!!
That should be the motto of this site. Perhaps even rephrased a little.
"NO solution is automatically the best."
In pro land there is a lot of mixing of signals, but balanced is used for long runs and microphones.
I did not know this. Been using balanced signals for decades and counting on them to keep the noise down. They don't always do it. This may explain why putting an isolation tyranny inline can work wonders. It's amazing how much better a transformer can work than a "normal" balanced line. Why should that be? Do you think it has to do with keeping the signal tightly balanced?
FWIW, Studer used to make a mixing console that had a completely balanced signal path. It was a nice sounding console, but don't know if the balanced part helped.
Panomaniac, those trannies are what I thought made a balanced line balanced, at least properly. Isolation at both ends, and differential signals to cancel out any yucky stuff in between.
I'm almost positive that the noise floor increases, as well as headroom decreases when you go from balanced to unbalanced. However, I have some reading to do so I can list my source for that argument, sorry!
I was considering moving to a pair of powered KRKs for my PC monitors, but with this latest crop of Pro amp discussions, I am seriously considering using my Krutke designed L15/27TDFC boxes instead.
Rgds,
Paul
I'm almost positive that the noise floor increases, as well as headroom decreases when you go from balanced to unbalanced. However, I have some reading to do so I can list my source for that argument, sorry!
I was considering moving to a pair of powered KRKs for my PC monitors, but with this latest crop of Pro amp discussions, I am seriously considering using my Krutke designed L15/27TDFC boxes instead.
Rgds,
Paul
xyrium said:
You still need x volts in for y volts out and it doesn't matter if the x volts is ballanced or unballanced.
eg if the amp needs 1v to reach full output:-
Unballanced:
signal = +1v
GND = 0v
Ballanced:
Hot = +0.5v
Cold = -0.5v
Unballanced into a ballanced input
Hot = +1v
Cold = 0v
It looks like you've halved the voltage needed in the ballanced system BUT the ballanced system does not use GND as a reference, it uses the other half of the ballanced pair. You've still got a 1v signal.
You'd only lose headroom if the voltage required at the input to get max output exceeded the range of the input buffer, highly HIGHLY unlikely on any good amp.
It would be a huge case of technical suicide if they made an amp that would not reach full power when using an unballanced input.
It could however be a case that your unballanced source can't make enough volts, but thats not the amps fault
The noise floor is random noise so CMNR won't help. The unballanced signal still passes through the same circuits as the ballanced one. But in reality the noise floor is usually dominated by whatever is infront of the amps and not the amps themselves.
Chris, I'm a single-ended guy thru and thru. I see the balanced circuit as an attractive alternative for phono preamps because the MC cart is inherently balanced and the step-up transformer is basically a balancing transformer. My thinking is, why unbalance it?
The balanced circuit is another of those cans of worms that seem to make up audio. People argue about the very concept of balanced. But a fully symmetric circuit like the Telefunken V69a looks intriguing to me. And those extra 6db won't hurt if you want the 115db (or whatever) of THX certified gear.
The balanced circuit is another of those cans of worms that seem to make up audio. People argue about the very concept of balanced. But a fully symmetric circuit like the Telefunken V69a looks intriguing to me. And those extra 6db won't hurt if you want the 115db (or whatever) of THX certified gear.
Hi phn,
Most gear is single ended inside anyway. If you don't actually need the extra complexity, why bother? Not to mention the extra 1.414 dB in noise.
Now, if you were to convert that balanced phono signal into single ended by virtue of the circuit design, so much the better. Most phono preamps simply ground one side anyway. Improving the noise figure is the goal at those levels.
-Chris
Most gear is single ended inside anyway. If you don't actually need the extra complexity, why bother? Not to mention the extra 1.414 dB in noise.
Now, if you were to convert that balanced phono signal into single ended by virtue of the circuit design, so much the better. Most phono preamps simply ground one side anyway. Improving the noise figure is the goal at those levels.
-Chris
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.