2. amps-preamps
  3. 1275225612

Balanced vs Unbalanced?

I am vaguely aware of the scientific merits of "Balanced wiring". I am only interested in the "Audio" merits.
CJ, a company that makes some of the best equipment on the planet, has no "Balanced" equipment that I know of. This puts some doubt on the audio merits of this circuitry. What is your opinion.
orpheus10
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
12,059 posts
 
I did forget something- a request. There are those of you here that disagree with my prior post and will have talking points. Please keep them if you can to one talking point at a time, so that we can be clear that they get responded to in a coherent fashion. Thanks!
almarg's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
almarg
9,670 posts
 
Ralph, thanks for the excellent comments and explanations. FWIW, I am in complete agreement.

I would just add the thought that in principle it is certainly possible to use active devices, as alternatives to the transformers you mentioned, to fully achieve the benefits of balanced interfaces with designs that are not balanced internally. However, as you indicated most examples of that approach are not in compliance with the 600 ohm standard and/or are poorly implemented.

Best regards,
-- Al
herman
2,274 posts
 
I would like to point out that it's not all lollipops and roses. One unmentioned difficulty is that for everything to work as designed you have to have a circuit capable of producing 2 signals that are exactly the same except for their polarity. I agree that using a differential circuit makes it easier but there are still a lot of things that can cause an imbalance. If there were not the CMRRs achieved would be much higher than they are.

The other problem I see with Atmasphere amps is the OTL output. Ralph has done an admirable job of overcoming the stability problems experienced by earlier designs but I don't think you can overcome the inherent problems caused by paralleling a bunch of tubes and using them in a push-pull circuit. I have no explanation but cathode follower amps have never sounded as good to me as common cathode.

I have 3 directly coupled triodes and an output transformer between my source and my speakers which I believe leads to much better sound than you can achieve with a more complex circuit. Of course, if anybody wants to send me an OTL amp to try I would be happy to entertain them.

While I do agree with Ralph's explanation of the technical side of things I disagree that this leads to circuits that sound better than an SET, but of course this is a debate that cannot be won on either side.

.
sidssp
1,077 posts
 
Herman,
IMHO, SETs are distortion generators. They can make a Yamaha violin sounds
like a Stradivarius. Like guitar amps, they should be considered more like a
musical instrument than audio reproducing equipment. Can SETs sound
good? Sure, I like them too. I used to built them when I was much younger.
But they are not Hi-Fi amps.

I know many people will disagree. Since we are talking about Hi-Fi here, Hi-
Fi or High Fidelity means faithfully reproduce. If an amp can make a Yamaha
violin sounds like a Stradivarius, it is not Hi-Fi, no matter how good it may
sound to some people.
darkmoebius
900 posts
 
06-01-10: Sidssp
IMHO, SETs are distortion generators. They can make a Yamaha violin sounds like a Stradivarius.
So can poorly designed/executed push-pull circuits(tube & solid state). Well designed/executed SE circuits in properly associated systems can also make Stradivarius sound like Stradivarius. The same can be said for most other well designed/executed circuit topologies.
More to discover