2. cables
  3. 1140528058

Is balanced necessarily better?

Assuming fully balanced equipment that also offers single ended connections, and no RFI problems, is the use of balanced interconnects necessarily the better way to go? My forum search indicates some who say balanced is better because the connectors are inherently better and because of noise cancelling properties associated with the signal flowing in both directions; and others who say for reasonably short runs and no interference problems that rca/single-ended connections sound better in many cases, maybe because the signal has less circuitry to traverse. This has come up for me because I am considering different preamp alternatives, and if I decide not to stay with a fully balanced system, I have more choices. To give things a try I substituted some old AudioTruth rca cables for my Luminous Sychestra Sig balanced cables. Except for the 6db loss in output, I have initially found the rca cables to sound a little smoother, with more rounded images, a little plumper bass, and what initially sounds like a more "musical" presentation. The system is a Muse Model 10 source/Muse Model 3 Sig pre/McCormack DNA 500/Aerial 9's. BTW, Steve McCormack told me the DNA 500 sees the signal the same way whether balanced or single-ended, and didn't seem to think the amp would sound significantly different either way. Therefore, even though many manufacturers are now offering more balanced equipment, especially at the upper end, others such as CJ continue to make only single-ended equipment. What are do you guys think, is balanced necessarily better?
mitch2
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
There is a lot of literature and it can be confusing as not everyone connects things in the same way or even grounds components in the same manner.

Here is another link

http://www.rane.com/note110.html

XLR balanced connections usually have Pin 1 as both cable shield and chassis ground. Pin 2 and 3 carry the signals. The connector is just a connector and protector.... it is most often not electrically connected to the cable wires even if it connects to the chassis ground of the component when the connection is made.

I fully agree with some comments above that balanced will have a cleaner signal processing as the -ve signal is not connected to the chassis ground as it most often is in RCA. Cleaner signal equals less noise pick up. Balanced clearly has an advantage in this sense.

I think the differences on this thread revolve around whether a more complex design and cleaner signal path is needed for most home audio. This is a matter of opinion, circumstances and personal experience. I think people will always draw the line differently.

The many manufacturers who do not bother with the additional cost of balanced designs and the many audiophiles who still pay huge $$$ for components with only the cheaper RCA connections and unbalanced designs, obviously believe RCA and chassis ground is good enough for the -ve signal. The home audio market may not be educated about the problems of noise or has never suffered significant noise problems with connecting a variety of components, but the market reflects people's opinions in what is built and sold.
nsgarch's avatar
nsgarch
2,524 posts
 
I think Shadorne's comment:

"The home audio market may not be educated about the problems of noise or has never suffered significant noise problems "

is important, because in discussing BAL vs. SE, it's the noise you can't hear (consciously) that contributes to (what I consider) a qualitative difference between the two.

Steve is correct about the location of the noise cancellation -- it's at the input end of the cable. However, components with truly balanced circuit topology do not convert balanced input signals to SE. Rather they convert SE signals to pseudo-balanced signals.
mitch2 OP
3,967 posts
 
Another thought I have heard regards phase effects, and the inability of some balanced cable makers to appropriately design cables to resist phase shift, which might be one reason some believe single-ended sounds better for home audio. I heard one of the successes of using bybees is to correct phase shift problems. Any truth to any of that?
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Nsgarch...Twice the signal and twice the noise. The only thing that matters is the signal-to-noise ratio, and this will be exactly the same for single ended or complementary circuitry, assuming the inverted signal circuit path performs the same as the inphase path.

The so called "extra" circuit needed to drive a complementary amplifier from a single ended input is in many cases an illusion. The amplifier usually includes a buffer stage at the input. With balanced input this buffer is the same (inverting or non-inverting)for both sides of the signal.
If you want to use an unbalanced input, one buffer is wired to be inverting and the other non-inverting. No extra circuitry is required.
bigtee
803 posts
 
McCormack uses a transformer (Jensen I believe) to perform this task in his upgrades. You can read about it on his sight. That is an extra conmponent. The Sony SCD-1 used a circuit to derive balanced and it didn't sound as good as SE. As I said, I've been messing around with this stuff and some sound better balanced, some worse and some sound better SE. There ways to implement this and it's not all about noise in all cases. Some implementations degrade the signal. All you have to do is listen for yourself.
More to discover