xlr vs rca

Hi Herman,
I like your précis, it's about as much to the point as it will get, but let me add one small item I been missing going through the thread.

The 'common mode rejection' also has the effect of favouring odd-order harmonics and cancelling even-order.

This seems to favour a more 'dynamic' presentation for rock and pop compared to SE which in turn would sound just a tad more 'natural' or ‘right’ with classical and acoustic instruments.

I am talking nuances here, but it can be heard, and which one is preferred is a matter of taste as always.

Greetings,
Axel

It's amazing how audio myths and misinformation persist in the minds of audiophiles. I vote with Almarg. He is about the only person who got it all correct. Raul was not wrong, either. His response was just not complete. Others get part credit. Herman, please tell me how the balanced differential circuits of Atma-sphere products are not "completely separate". Atma-sphere should get all credit for pioneering the use of balanced circuits at a time (early 80s) when such topologies were practically unheard of in commercial audio gear.

Yes, very true. A lot of people post that don't have any idea what they are talking about.

The circuit Almarg described consists of 2 amplifiers or series of amplifiers one of which amplifies the inverted signal and the other the non-inverted. They can indeed be completely separate until applied to the speaker.

A differential circuit of the type used by Atmasphere consists of 2 tubes that share a common connection; the cathodes of the tubes. This is sometimes referred to as a long tail pair. It is difficult to explain circuit theory in a forum such as this but rest assured the 2 signals do interact in a differential amplifier. Applying a signal to either input will cause current to flow in both tubes. The circuit amplifies the difference between the signals, hence the name. It does not amplify any signal which is the same i.e. it rejects any common mode signals. If the 2 halves were separate and did not interact the circuit would not work as intended.

You can google it for more info.

Lew, thanks for the kind comments. Herman is more knowledgeable than I am concerning the type of balanced architecture he referred to, and I will defer to his comments. Perhaps my reference to fully balanced architecture should simply have said that it maintains a balanced pair of signals throughout its internal signal path.

On a separate note, one thing I neglected to emphasize in my post is that besides providing rejection of noise (in the sense of high frequency hiss and buzz), a balanced interface is much less susceptible to low frequency hum problems. Shadorne alluded to that, and the paper he linked to explains why.

Basically, since the chassis of single-ended equipment is connected to ac safety ground, to signal ground, and to the shields of single-ended interconnects connected between components, any offset in ac safety ground potential between the two components will cause an extraneous 60Hz current to flow through the shield, in common with signal return current. As Shadorne points out, the magnitude of the resulting hum will be dependent on the resistance of the path through the shield, and therefore on the particular interconnect.

If the interface between the two components is balanced, that becomes a non-problem, since the conductors for signal current and signal return current are separate from the shield of the cable. That is true whether or not the components are "fully balanced."

Regards,
-- Al

With the large amount of excellent SE gear it is hard to argue that balanced is inherently better in a home environment even though those that make it and use it would disagree.

SE gear is cheaper so it must be better - the savings can be used towards gold plated RCA connectors and ground loops are rare in the home... ;-) LOL