From my experience, every situation that had both options, the balanced connection and/or increased gain sounded better, regardless of the bolume knob’s final position. More detail , air, emotional connection etc. The single ended cables used were good, not the bargain or so called high end extreme.
Sometimes using balanced or xlr it involved just the source, but optimally it carried through thd entire chain.
Anyways, my question is: has anyone ever thought that single ended sounded better?given the 2 options. Im only referring to a truly balanced connection.
I ask, because a manufacturer who makes tube amps, recommends single over balanced connection. Is there something else involved in this decision, additional parts or labor complexity? Is the signal path extended?
Then there is the argument that the AES48, as an application is a sonic limitation in itself, and is part and parcel and core to the idea that all AES48 applications have little noted differences in their sonic signatures.
You might try it. But keep in mind that if such were really the case the Golden Age of HiFi in the 1950s would never have happened. Basically what you seem to be suggesting is that the cables are too colored to be able to hear a difference, which is oxymoronic. Coloration is exactly what the balanced line system solves.
My Livingroom Benchmark gear is AES48 compliant. I very happy running relatively low cost Benchmark XLR interconnect between preamp and amp (both Benchmark). I have tried more expensive XLR's. On my sources that are from varies manufacturers I found that the interconnects matter. So there I use Audience Au24 SE and various WyWire.
On my office system, I have a KRELL amp and CODA preamp which I am not sure is AES48 compliant. I am running the 15+ foot Benchmark XLR between the 2. I am afraid to try any expensive XLR between them. My ignorance will save me money.
Then there is the argument that the AES48, as an application is a sonic limitation in itself, and is part and parcel and core to the idea that all AES48 applications have little noted differences in their sonic signatures.
I’m not stating that this, which I have written...is the correct view, but that it is among the possible outcomes in the grand scheme of things.
The idea that the signal intelligence is in the fields and if the field guides/’partners in crime’ be compromised in identical fashion (via strict ubiquity in AES48 design and application), then...well...
But this is a condition that is vertically nonexistent in high end audio.
The reality is that the quality of the interconnect usually trumps single ended versus balanced for the vast majority of actual systems. I have never heard a system where the single ended / balanced was a significant factor.
Just for the purposes of discussion, what if you used an AES48 compliant cable between compliant devices, but used such poor quality wire that both signal wires in a cable negatively affected the sound in an equivalent fashion.
@zlone@ghdprenticeOne of the benefits of balanced line operation is that the 'sound' of the interconnect is vastly reduced or eliminated (in particular if the low impedance aspect of balanced operation is supported). This benefit accrues even if the connection is only 6 inches long. If you've ever auditioned RCA cables and heard a difference, this is the 'sound' to which I refer. Imagine a technology where that problem of having to choose cables to match the system is eliminated. I've used cables that were 50 years old, with rubber insulation and tin-plated wire and no ill effects at all.
In the home the benefit is being able to place your amps next to the speakers, thus minimizing the coloration of the speaker cables because you can run a shorter speaker cable, plus never having angst about upgrading your interconnects. And of course phono cartridges are balanced sources- if there's anywhere in a system where the cable has to get it right, its the cable between the tonearm and preamp- if you can run that balanced you can get closer to real neutrality and the cable need not be expensive.
People often say how balanced is more expensive; in high end audio it isn't. Its often cheaper since you're not paying for expensive interconnects that become white elephants over time.
Just for the purposes of discussion, what if you used an AES48 compliant cable between compliant devices, but used such poor quality wire that both signal wires in a cable negatively affected the sound in an equivalent fashion.
Ok. If I am running interconnects for several hundred feet… it is important. But this is a condition that is vertically nonexistent in high end audio.
The reality is that the quality of the interconnect usually trumps single ended versus balanced for the vast majority of actual systems. I have never heard a system where the single ended / balanced was a significant factor. The additional cost for balanced typically is significant. So, it really remains best a dilemma for folks with very high end systems. If you have to be budget conscious. Then get single ended… don’t think twice. If you are trying to assault the highest achievable… then try both.
My average component cost is $20K and my manufacturer recommends balanced… I couldn’t detect the difference… so it is small. I suggest worrying about the big stuff… this ain’t it for most folks.
I thought this newsletter below was perfect for this post but no mention of the AES48 standard.
Mike
The Audio Classics’ Newsletter
The Audio Classics’ Newsletter
Greetings!
Balanced vs Unbalanced Cables
Introduction
So what’s the big deal about balanced lines? The answer is that they allow audio signals, even very low level audio signals, to be sent hundreds of feet with little risk of electrical interference.
Specific Differences
Unbalanced Lines
An unbalanced line is made up of two conductors: a single insulated center conductor surrounded by a braided or foil shield.
The shield is connected to earth ground. The signal is carried by both the shield and center conductor. The theory is that extraneous signals will be routed by the shield to earth ground so they will not reach the center conductor to interfere with the signal. Unfortunately this theory does not always hold up. With unbalanced lines longer than a few feet, the exposure to interference becomes more likely and the result is that hum or other noise can get into the center conductor and then be passed along to the rest of the system.
RCA connectors are used on unbalanced lines.
Since the shield is at one potential (ground) and the center conductor is at a different potential, the line is said to be ’unbalanced’.
As a rule of thumb, use unbalanced lines only in short lengths, up to 15 feet or so.
Balanced Lines
A balanced line is made up of three conductors: two separate conductors in the center surrounded by a braided or foil shield.
As in unbalanced lines, the shield is connected to earth ground. In balanced lines, the signal is carried by the two conductors inside the shield (but not the shield itself). The theory is a little more complicated. As above, the purpose of the shield is to route extraneous signals to ground so they won’t interfere with the signal circuit. But there’s more. Since the two conductors are part of the same circuit, they carry the same voltage and current but in opposite directions. Any interference that does permeate the shield will affect both center conductors in the same way. Since the current in the two conductors is in opposite directions, the interference is cancelled out. The signal is not affected.
XLR connectors are used on balanced lines.
Since the two conductors within the shield are at the same potential in relation to earth ground, the line is said to be ’balanced’.
As a rule of thumb, use balanced lines for any length and whenever you can, but particularly for lines longer than 15 feet or so in length.
— by Tom DeForest
McIntosh Performance Audio Cables
McIntosh premium audio cables are engineered to optimize the performance of our amplifiers, preamplifiers, source components and speakers. These cables will perfectly complete your McIntosh home audio or home theater system.
The construction quality of McIntosh audio cables has to be of the highest order since they are built to match the renowned longevity of McIntosh products.
Starting at $600/pair
Call 607-766-3501 for details.
Audio Classics
Premium
Interconnects
Audio Classics Interconnects are hand made right here in New York State, using the finest audio cable and connectors.
The cables feature gold plated XLR pin/socket connections as well as gold plated RCA connectors. Then they are wrapped in, USA made, cut and abrasion resistant, sheathing. All of this makes for cable that will pass the maximum amount of musical information between your components.
Have you been eyeing a new component but were unsure of what to do with your existing ones?
Now with the Audio Classics TradeUP Program, there’s an easy way for you to upgrade to a current model without having to pay full price or having to deal with the hassle of selling your existing components. Simply trade in your qualified mono or stereo amplifier, preamplifier, integrated amplifier, tuner or receiver and get up to 75 percent of the price you paid for it towards the purchase of a new amplifier, pre-amplifier, integrated amplifier or receiver.
Interesting. Are you saying that both amplifiers and cables that are billed as balanced might not be to standard?
Absolutely yes for real. I've been harping on this fact for years. I've not sorted out if high end audio manufacturers choose to ignore this issue or are simply ignorant. But its common in 'high end audio' for some reason.
Interesting. Are you saying that both amplifiers and cables that are billed as balanced might not be to standard?
Yes, that has been my experience. See @atmaspherewrote on a good post thoroughly explaining that. Also see related article below: Rane Sound System Interconnection
The wiring diagram below shows the correct way to make balanced cables compliant to the AES48 standard.
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.
I remember reading a post a couple years ago, about a guy that had atmasphere equipment and he said he could hear a difference in cables.
People also hear voices that are not there.
But can they tell whether a cable is there without looking?
To be honest, I could hear no significant difference in sound reproduction. My only recourse is to try a higher level of AQ cable, but that costs way more and I don't want to spend that much on an experiment (-though it would be good to know and finally dispel the notion that XLR cables DO sound different in equipment supporting the AES48 standard).
IMO It certainly seems like a better approach to put the funds into Ralph’s components (and the others that follow the spec.).
… But then I am not much into cable lore. Usually using the same Mogami stuff in RCA.
As I posted at the beginning, I bought the Mogami XLR cable from Ralph when I bought his amp and preamp. I then bought some AQ cable on the recommendation of my dealer ( which cost more, by the way).
To be honest, I could hear no significant difference in sound reproduction. My only recourse is to try a higher level of AQ cable, but that costs way more and I don't want to spend that much on an experiment (-though it would be good to know and finally dispel the notion that XLR cables DO sound different in equipment supporting the AES48 standard).
Thank you for the thorough explanation as this clears up quite a lot in regard to those who hear balance cable differences and acquire additional 6 db of gain compared to RCA single ended. .Makes plenty of sense.
With those who report here they have fully balanced audio systems input to output and yet they hear very distinct differences among balanced cable brand/models. Are there alternative or proprietary balanced audio circuits by these manufacturers or are they not true balanced circuits?
Is this due to balance audio via use of transformers or deviating fully differential circuit approaches?
@charles1dadYou can have a fully differential balanced preamp that does not support the balanced standard. In tube preamps this is common because coupling caps are used at the output. That coupling cap is usually part of a cathode follower circuit, and a cathode follower produces its output with respect to ground.
So that means you have two cathode followers, one for each phase, each referencing ground. The nice thing about this is that one of those can be employed as a single-ended output, so seeing RCAs and XLRs on such preamps is common. When two independent outputs are used like this, Common Mode Rejection Ratio is reduced in the system- it can never be truly balanced.
The balanced standard ignores ground, IOW the output of a device that supports AES48 does not generate either phase with respect to ground. Usually the way to do this is with an output transformer, whose secondary is connected to pin 2 and pin 3 of the XLR output and nothing else.
We patented an method of getting doing this without an output transformer, because as you know, we're the OTL guys. IOW you can support AES48 by using a Circlotron output, which is at the core of both of our patents in this area. It is possible to use semiconductors to support the standard.
One clue that the standard is supported is the 6dB issue- if the volume increases 6dB when running the preamp balanced as opposed to single-ended, that means it does not support the standard. The reason why is explained in the first paragraph above.
I think there is the idea that a transformer is a Bad Idea and so most high end audio manufacturers avoid using them (Backert Labs is an example of one that uses a transformer so they gear supports the standard). So as you point out, you get really variable results and people hear all kinds of differences in cables that simply shouldn't be there.
If the manufacturer supports AES48 they should say that- if not, ask them. If they don't know the answer, then they probably do not 😉
My components say they are balanced, but how does one really know if they are built to the AES standard? I have never seen this mentioned in the specs.
Call the manufacturer and ask if their audio components are AES48 compliant.
If audio components are "truly" built to the AES balanced standard then there is minimal to no sonic differences heard with various balanced cable regardless of their cost or claims.
My components say they are balanced, but how does one really know if they are built to the AES standard? I have never seen this mentioned in the specs.
If audio components are "truly" built to the AES balanced standard then there is minimal to no sonic differences heard with various balanced cable regardless of their cost or claims.
With those who report here they have fully balanced audio systems input to output and yet they hear very distinct differences among balanced cable brand/models. Are there alternative or proprietary balanced audio circuits by these manufacturers or are they not true balanced circuits?
Is this due to balance audio via use of transformers or deviating fully differential circuit approaches?
I have tried, like you, to educate those on this forum for years. In fact, it is your knowledge that has guided me.
So, l want to give one last clarification on the RCA/XLR conundrum:
If your equipment supports the AES Standard, then whatever cable you use should not impart a significant sound quality difference.
If you use equipment not supporting the AES Standard or use RCA (unbalanced) cables, then you may/may not find significant differences in sound quality in using different cables.
FWIW, my dealer suggested some AQ Balanced wire to be an upgrade to the wire Atmasphere sold me for his equipment (25 ft length). Long story short, I noticed no significant difference in sound quality between the two cables. They both sounded good, but given the price difference, I would buy Ralph’s cables.
Audiogon members come here to find information. Hopefully, based on experience and fact.
Though I haven’t been here very long, I have found the advice/information Atmasphere has given to be sound and based in fact. It is the reason I ended up buying his equipment. (And, given his ability to produce quality equipment, I probably will be getting his Class D monoblocks in the near future.
This is why XLR is especially good for long runs. The additional line for the single path is also responsible for the 6 dB gain
If your setup supports the balanced standard there will be no 6dB gain difference between balanced and single-ended.
I'd not considered this point before, but given that the signal is duplicated then reversed then transported then recombined, doesn't that mean that any coloration or other effect by the interconnect is simply negated? So, you don't really need fancy balanced cables?
If your equipment supports the balanced standard then you don't need fancy cables. If it does not support the standard, you'll find yourself auditioning cables to find the one that sounds 'right'. Personally I find this a bit silly, since the balanced line system is a technology that eliminates cable colorations.
I'd not considered this point before, but given that the signal is duplicated then reversed then transported then recombined, doesn't that mean that any coloration or other effect by the interconnect is simply negated? So, you don't really need fancy balanced cables?
“As an owner of an ARC Ref 6 and Ref 80S and Ref 150 SE I know that Warren Gehl and Co strongly suggest running balanced with the very best IC’s you can afford. I conducted listening tests with a wide assortment of balanced IC’s at all price ranges and heard huge differences. I settled on Cardas Clear Beyond. ‘
I just saw this. Very nice system. As an illustration to the forum… I am going to repeat your text with my experiences. This is in no way saying you are incorrect. But I am pointing out no matter how similar your systems the answer can be different.
My experience: As an owner of an ARC Ref 6SE and Ref 160s and Ref 160m monos, I know that Warren Gehl and Co strongly suggest running balanced with the very best IC’s you can afford. I conducted listening tests with a wide assortment of balanced and unbalanced IC’s at all price ranges and heard huge differences. I settled on Transparent Ultra after extensive testing of Cardas Beyond. I found no significant audible difference between single ended and XLR.
There are a lot of similarities in our systems and yet to me in my system Transparent was far superior to Cardas (I tried all kinds). But we definitely agree that there are very large differences in the sound quality among interconnects.
I am runnning Triode Audio TRX-M845 mono blocks into Acoustic Zen speakers. The exact set up that has won several "best in show" sound room awards. So I asked Triode what cable format they use. They answered they use RCA cables in every situation. Who am I to argue with them?
Unfortunately this question can not be answered in absolute terms in a general manner. It is always component to component dependent.
Example: all of my components are single ended: preamp, mono blocks & sources. My preamp is capable of driving long runs of quality se Interconnects. 25 feet from preamp out to the mono blocks with no issues. Other quality preamps may not be so endowed.
Additionally, many "balanced" preamps output from 6-9V to the amplifier(s). My mono blocks only require 1V to achieve full rated output.
My se Interconnects are all the same throughout my system, are hand made by myself with great shielded cable & superb connectors.
Essentially, one "size" doesn't work for everyone. You must not have an inflexible mindset & experiment.
That said, if you have equipment with XLR connectivity exclusively then you have no choice.
n the conversations with him, I mentioned that, in my mind, for balanced to work at it’s best, it should be designed in layout (from the active transmission end and at the active receive end) with an RF design and build mindset, where the field effects are a major consideration, down to the board mounting points and any local potential of the chassis and circuit boards in having any additional field effect interference. Just for the sake of the last little bits of attainable perfection in actual gear. Also, that these active aspects should be mirror imaged against one another and that includes a localized short run mirrored power supply for said mirrored circuit halves.
@teo_audioHonestly you don't have to do any of that! As a sort of proof, look at the studio gear used to make LPs and CDs- none of that involves any such practice. As you recall, we've been doing balanced line longer than anyone else in high end audio, and I've yet to see where any of what you suggest would be a thing. Look at it this way: a lot of studio gear employs transformers to execute the balanced operation and those transformers don't have nearly that kind of bandwidth nor do they need to.
Since the balanced line system is supposed to ignore ground, you really don't have an issue of 'any local potential of the chassis and circuit boards in having any additional field effect interference'. Such might become an issue if AES48 is ignored in the design.
Kinda like vinyl over digital debate…one is less dynamic range and softer while the other has greater dynamics and contrast. True Balanced gear is superior objectively. Subjectivity however is a large part of this hobby!
Hey ralph, I’d mention a name on the whole balanced vs single ended thing, but he did not throw his hat into the public discussion ring, so I can’t. Not like it would mean much other than making them a participant outside of their knowing or permission.
In the conversations with him, I mentioned that, in my mind, for balanced to work at it’s best, it should be designed in layout (from the active transmission end and at the active receive end) with an RF design and build mindset, where the field effects are a major consideration, down to the board mounting points and any local potential of the chassis and circuit boards in having any additional field effect interference. Just for the sake of the last little bits of attainable perfection in actual gear. Also, that these active aspects should be mirror imaged against one another and that includes a localized short run mirrored power supply for said mirrored circuit halves.
If one opens up some high end equipment and in especially pro gear, one will not see this attempted, at all. And, this, done out to about a 1mhz level of signal handing capacity in the active circuits. Only then will the active circuitry be able to handle the micro perturbations well enough to damp/control them out to being largely below the complex sensitivities of the human ear, in the best of the listeners out there. Spectral, for one, tends to do things this way. There are others. (the designer I speak of, who agreed with this assessment, is responsible for some high level studio gear as well as home audio)
I recall replacing Silver Surfer XLRs with WireWorld Platinum Eclipse 8 - HUGE difference in quality. Im not inclined to A/B them at this point, though, it might eat at me. However, I used a sample Nano 45 graphene contact enhancer on the WWs, and can’t find the rest, so I assume that would skew the A/B
FWIW you can have an entirely differential balanced preamp and it may not support the balanced standard. If you hear differences like you describe above it probably doesn't.
Back in the 1950s in the Golden Age of Stereo a great number of remarkable recordings were made. They still sound great today- and the better our systems get the better these recordings sound. They have the kind of neutrality that they do largely because the balanced line system is an exotic cable technology- but instead of spending the money on the cables, the money is spent on driving them and handling them correctly so colorations are eliminated.
Cable manufacturers hate it when I talk about this! That's because if the standard is supported in your equipment, its very difficult for them to make a sale if you listen to what your ears are telling you.
It is a Peter Madnick design: Audio Alchemy DDP- 1> LSA Voyager 350 GaN amp. I never considered that the DDP-1 might not be True/Dif balanced. This certainly isn’t definitive from TAS review Robert Harley 3/2016: I began by listening to LPs, driving the DDP-1’s balanced analog input, and none of the other reviews say so, but here in an Agon discussion; I was told that the DDP-1 is completely balanced from the DAC chip to XLR jack including a 4-gang Alps potentiometer (one deck per phase per channel). .
I recall replacing Silver Surfer XLRs with WireWorld Platinum Eclipse 8 - HUGE difference in quality. Im not inclined to A/B them at this point, though, it might eat at me. However, I used a sample Nano 45 graphene contact enhancer on the WWs, and can’t find the rest, so I assume that would skew the A/B
That said, I do find differences in mfg XLR cables (including length of identical cables), which could be the XLRs themselves, and/or quality of solder/ joints, as well as the wire, shielding, jacketing...
@tweak1This is why I harp about AES48 and low impedance operation! If your gear is neither (for example any balanced ARC preamp and I'm not picking on them in particular) then you will hear cable differences. That's not supposed to happen. But too much 'high end audio' equipment does not support the balanced standard even though it really is otherwise balanced.
+1 to Ralph. I switched to Dif/True balanced systems decades ago. That said, I do find differences in mfg XLR cables (including length of identical cables), which could be the XLRs themselves, and/or quality of solder/ joints, as well as the wire, shielding, jacketing...
I didn’t read all the responses but I don’t know if anybody talked about, in true balanced, how one of the signal paths is inverted. So over the course of the cable if any RF or electromatic electromagnetic interference is introduced when the inverted signal is flipped back over at the destination those additions to the signal cancel out. This is why XLR is especially good for long runs. The additional line for the single path is also responsible for the 6 dB gain
Is that a description of CMRR?
(Common Mode Rejection Ratio?)
I didn’t read all the responses but I don’t know if anybody talked about, in true balanced, how one of the signal paths is inverted. So over the course of the cable if any RF or electromatic electromagnetic interference is introduced when the inverted signal is flipped back over at the destination those additions to the signal cancel out. This is why XLR is especially good for long runs. The additional line for the single path is also responsible for the 6 dB gain
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
