balanced vs unbalanced

What is it about the performance of your current setup that leaves you unsatisfied?

In other words, just because we CAN do something doesn't necessarily mean that we should.

If you have not identified a specific improvement criteria, then blindly making changes may or may not do many things; some desirable, some not.

If you can run balanced- do so. Balanced cables are more effective than their single-ended counterparts and the system will sound better for that reason alone- assuming that the amp is indeed balanced internally.

The original balanced standard was developed decades ago specifically to get around interconnect problems. If you think about it, all the best recordings of the 50s and 60s were done with balanced cables. If there was a problem with 150' long microphone interconnects (like the ones Mercury used to record at Northrup Auditorium in Minneapolis), you'd think you'd here it with today's equipment. But you don't and in fact many of those recordings are regarded as reference quality today.

I would think an audiophile would *jump* at the chance to eliminate the vulgarities that an interconnect cable can introduce! That's what balanced lines are *for*!!

Jumpers: some components recommend, some dont require it. Going to balanced usually increases the gain and allows a longer run of cable with less loss.

If everything is proper, no difference of sound quality.

Noise is cancelled when it gets on both hot and cold input of balanced system, and that was the main reason balanced input has been adopted for professional system where the input line can be long through noisy environment.

I can't hear a difference in my setup. My interconnects are only a meter though. For long runs over 6' I'd use balanced but it's usually not necessary.