Balanced Interconnects

Well no.
The design, manufacturing and cost challenges of a fully balanced internal circuit far outweigh the easy conversion circuit design.
I don't think many will deny that a true fully balanced piece will be significantly more expensive to build with comparable quality components than one that is not, and you will see this reflected in prices. The question is, is it worth it? Some of the best in the world think it is, offering only balanced connections. (Others have made the opposite choice, voting for the simplicity and lower cost of single ended solutions.)
 
We spend so much time and money in upgrading the components when a simple interconnect upgrade is where the benefit is at.

Paying attention to 'all' details is where it's at. It personally drives me nuts when I see folks foaming at the mouth with their latest 'wire' acquisition and the same not paying attention to speaker placement and room acoustics, that's where it's at !
 
I used to design broadcast audio gear for a living. How balanced inputs and outputs are designed is more important that the difference between single ended RCA and balanced XLR.

Putting aside the internal balanced component architecture for a minute.....

A well designed balanced input will have significant common mode noise rejection, expressed as the Common Mode Rejection Ratio (CMRR). CMRR is a measure of how well a balanced input stage rejects noise, usually powerline noise. A good input stage will have 60 - 80 dB of CMRR @ 60 Hz. I don’t see a lot of consumer gear manufacturers specifying CMRR. Another advantage of using XLR connectors is they lock, have high pressure contacts, and are just generally physically more robust that RCA.

By contrast, a single ended RCA interconnect has no common mode noise rejection. Worse that that, the cable shield is the signal ground and so you are connecting different component signal grounds together, which, depending on their design, especially power supplies, is inviting hum and ground loops into your system.

On the output side, if a balanced output is truly balanced and floating you can short one side to ground and have the level on the other side double. This is easy to do with transformers, much harder to do with solid state or tube output sections. I suspect most consumer gear won’t pass this test.

As far as sound, well that depends on how well the gear is engineered. Balanced interconnects may require more circuitry, which could degrade the sound. But there are exceptions, like the McIntosh MC 275, where an additional gain section is used for the single ended inputs as opposed to the balanced inputs.

On balance, even for short runs, the advantage of balanced interconnects not running signal ground on the cable shield between components is significant enough that I will default to balanced unless I can prove to myself that unbalanced sounds better or unbalanced is the only alternative.
 
I used to design broadcast audio gear for a living. How balanced inputs and outputs are designed is more important that the difference between single ended RCA and balanced XLR.

Putting aside the internal balanced component architecture for a minute.....

A well designed balanced input will have significant common mode noise rejection, expressed as the Common Mode Rejection Ratio (CMRR). CMRR is a measure of how well a balanced input stage rejects noise, usually powerline noise. A good input stage will have 60 - 80 dB of CMRR @ 60 Hz. I don’t see a lot of consumer gear manufacturers specifying CMRR. Another advantage of using XLR connectors is they lock, have high pressure contacts, and are just generally physically more robust that RCA.

By contrast, a single ended RCA interconnect has no common mode noise rejection. Worse that that, the cable shield is the signal ground and so you are connecting different component signal grounds together, which, depending on their design, especially power supplies, is inviting hum and ground loops into your system.

On the output side, if a balanced output is truly balanced and floating you can short one side to ground and have the level on the other side double. This is easy to do with transformers, much harder to do with solid state or tube output sections. I suspect most consumer gear won’t pass this test.

As far as sound, well that depends on how well the gear is engineered. Balanced interconnects may require more circuitry, which could degrade the sound. But there are exceptions, like the McIntosh MC 275, where an additional gain section is used for the single ended inputs as opposed to the balanced inputs.

On balance, even for short runs, the advantage of balanced interconnects not running signal ground on the cable shield between components is significant enough that I will default to balanced unless I can prove to myself that unbalanced sounds better or unbalanced is the only alternative.

Based on your experience, is there generally a preferred approach between:

- doubling up circuitry to generate a balanced signal: or

- using a transformer?
 
Here are the trade offs:
A well designed transformer has the advantage of galvanic isolation so can eliminate any ground loops.

Transformer distortion is higher than the equivalent balanced electronic circuit and increases with decreasing frequency.

Most high end audio gear uses solid state balanced ins and outs so there really isn’t a lot of choice
 
Here are the trade offs:
A well designed transformer has the advantage of galvanic isolation so can eliminate any ground loops.

Transformer distortion is higher than the equivalent balanced electronic circuit and increases with decreasing frequency.

Most high end audio gear uses solid state balanced ins and outs so there really isn’t a lot of choice
 
Back
Top