Do different brands/levels of balanced XLR ended cables going to and from differentially balanced components make a difference?
They shouldn't. The question really should be- does the equipment used support the balanced line standard. If no- then cables make a difference. If yes, the cables won't affect things even in long runs.
I feel compelled to set the record straight in a couple of areas:
BTW-There is no such thing as a "balanced cable". That term implies that
an XLR/Cannon connector was only designed to be used with fully
balanced left/right channel audio components which is very misleading
and completely false. There are solid state components that are fully
balanced with both RCA and XLR connector's. The inventor of the XLR
never used the term "balanced" for his connector. When the very first
stereo receiver was invented by Sydney Harman in the 1950's, the
Festival 1000, it was a fully balanced design in twin cabinets with the
left channel in one cabinet and the right in the other. with a control
panel on the front of each unit. A classic dual mono design. The unit
had RCA connector's only. The term "balanced" was a label put on XLR
cables by Audiophiles in the 80's. You can label an RCA cable as well as
a "balanced cable" if its used between fully balanced components.
The above post is 100% false. The Festival 1000 employed single-ended circuits (combined with a Williamson-style power amp section); thus it used RCA connections. RCA connections are not balanced- the shield connection is used to shield the 'signal' but in reality the shield is important as it completes the circuit. In a balanced connection the shield is ignored (unless the equipment in use does not support the balanced standard, AKA 'AES File 48'). The phone company originally used balanced line connections in the 1950s, which is what made trans-continental phone calls possible and the term 'balanced' was used way back then.
As applies to audio, the balanced connection is used to minimize the effect of the interconnect cable. You would think audiophiles would jump on this like a hobo on a ham sandwich! But I have been surprised at the amount of push back over the decades since we introduced the idea. Regardless, if your gear actually supports balanced operation as intended, the cable isn't going to be something that requires audition- its simply going to work without editorializing.
Since I mentioned the balanced standard, here are the important bits again for those that did not read the thread Al linked above
1) the source will be low impedance able to drive 2KOhms with no worries
2) the signal is pins 2 and 3 of the XLR connection, and travel as a twisted pair within the cable
3) ground is shield only and is ignored by both the source and at the receiving end
Its that last bit that gets so many in trouble- if it is not followed, then the shield (just like with single-ended operation) becomes part of the overall sound and you start to 'hear' 'differences'. ARC as pointed out does not support the standard, as they have no preamps that can drive 1 or 2Kohms and their outputs (pins 2 and 3) occur with respect to ground (pin1) rather than with respect to each other. With such a preamp the choice of cable will be important- ***which means the point of balanced line operation is defeated***, even if the preamp is internally balanced!
We got around this problem with a floating output that ignores ground. In the old days this was done with an output transformer (usually set up to drive 600 ohms which is the old balanced standard input impedance); we are the OTL guys so we did it OTL; our outputs are balanced and direct-coupled (thus also eliminating the output coupling cap; the latter being used often indicates that the circuit does not support the standard...).
