When to choice XLR over RCA ICs.

Keep it up I am learning.

Again Thanks,

Bob

2. Slight Volume Increase. No ’better’ or ’preferred’ or ’different' sound, but a discernable volume increase, IF that makes a difference. btw, other equipment, no volume difference, so it’s the Sony xa5400’s output that is slightly stronger, not the cable.

@elliottbnewcombjr If this is the case, it means the Sony doesn't support the balanced standard. Instead, what it has is two single-ended outputs, one out of phase with the other. So when you run balanced you get 6dB more output.

If it supported the balanced standard, the output level would not change.

When this sort of thing goes on, you lose most of the benefit of going balanced. You retain the noise aspect, but the choice of cable will become important to get the best sound and you might have to deal with a ground loop (since ground is being referenced by the output of the player). Neither is an issue if AES48 is supported.

atmasphere

... it means the Sony doesn't support the balanced standard ... When this sort of thing goes on, you lose most of the benefit of going balanced.

What is the greatest advantage of using balanced components? There are multiple advantages, so the answer is subjective and debatable. In my view, the answer is lower noise. That would explain why we see so many differntially balanced components that do not comply with the AES48 standard that you tout.

There are several ways of designing an AES48 compliant component, and some have negative sonic effects. So the AES48 standard is not itself a guarantee of performance.

What is the greatest advantage of using balanced components? There are multiple advantages, so the answer is subjective and debatable. In my view, the answer is lower noise. That would explain why we see so many differntially balanced components that do not comply with the AES48 standard that you tout.

There are several ways of designing an AES48 compliant component, and some have negative sonic effects. So the AES48 standard is not itself a guarantee of performance.

Of course! But it is a guarantee of plug and play insofar as the cables are concerned.

I don't know of a way that has a 'negative sonic effect' that is specific to AES48. Perhaps you could point one out to me.

I know of a good number of reasons that can cause a 'negative sonic effect' when the standard isn't supported, for example a ground loop. Nasty, and easily detected, so not really subjective.

The advantages of balanced components is different from balanced cables, since you can have single-ended equipment that uses balanced connections, like my RCA and Westerex microphone preamps.

But if we stick to your question above, the advantages are several. Its more than just lower noise; item 6 would seem to be the one in which most audiophiles would be interested, although IME that isn't always the case:

1) lower noise in each gain stage (if the circuit is differential; a 6dB theoretical noise reduction per stage of gain), You can see an advantage for high gain circuits like a phono section where you might have 12 or 18 dB less noise than an equivalent single-ended circuit.

2) greater power supply noise immunity

3) Greater rejection of magnetic fields (like from a power transformer) that might be close to the equipment

4) rejection of noise imposed on the interconnect cable by a power cord, transformer or the like (Common Mode Rejection Ratio is the term used for this)

5) immunity to ground loops

6) (if AES48 is supported) interconnect cable immunity; IOW no sonic effects caused by the cable itself.

Only item 6 might be considered subjective although its easily demonstrated so its the only item of debate.

The advantage of the cable itself is it does not have to be expensive to work perfectly. This is also easily proven so really isn't debatable.

What is debatable is the use of balanced lines actually being an advantage when the standard isn't supported. That is why this thread exists. Sometimes its better, sometimes its not, because in this circumstance, the benefit of balanced lines isn't fully realized.

atmasphere

What is debatable is the use of balanced lines actually being an advantage when the standard isn’t supported ... Sometimes its better, sometimes its not ...

I agree completely, and made that point because I disagreed with your prior claim:

the Sony doesn’t support the balanced standard ... When this sort of thing goes on, you lose most of the benefit of going balanced.

You do not inherently lose "most of the benefit" of balanced components by not supporting AES48, imo. Sometimes it’s better, sometimes it’s not. As for this:

... I don’t know of a way that has a ’negative sonic effect’ that is specific to AES48 ...

I’ve seen and heard AES48 compliant balanced components that sounded w-a-y better on the SE inputs and you probably have, too. When cheap tiny xformers are used for the conversion it can suck the HF right out of the sound. Same thing if cheap opamp ICs are used. Of course, poor implementations such as those don’t render the standard any more invalid than the standard renders all non-compliant components invalid. It all depends on the implementation.