Do balanced (XLR) inputs offer much better sound?

The one opportunity I had to compare balanced and single-ended versions of a similar cable in a system capable of handling both, I actually preferred the single-ended.

Based on my reading, the real advantage of balanced cables enters when dealing with long runs of cable (pro usage). The longer the run of cable, the more important the noise reduction capabilites of the balanced connection become.

In the PRO arena, gear is rated as +4 db nominal output, and consumer gear is at -10 db.

This means there is a gain structure challenge between various gear.

On the PRO side, keyborads, pre's, recorders etc, are used all the time with variables between... depending on the nest o' gear a person may own.

In the studio, the preferred connection is a balanced line level, because of EMI/RFI etc, and the optimal connectivity would be a line cable, balanced (2 conductors and a shield) at an impedence of 110ohms. Most mastering engineers prefer this because that spec (AES/EBU) will transfer both analog and digtal without complication). IT is more expensive however to wire this way so most folks rely on the standard audio cables.

Using an XLR does offer a superior signal path, because the ground is not shared but, as we know, all listeners do not have the same perceptives when hearing. So in the end, wire is subjective.

To that end, there are tons of audiophile sites and Home Theater folks who subscribe to the tenets regarding superior cable etc.

For the record, and this is not a spam post, so please read in context, the science of making wire has changed over the last several years. The differences are huge anymore between certain brands as well as the costs.

An associate had asked me to look in on this site, and it's a very comprehensive.

I would suggest that the listening between the XLR and the single RCA termination, mentioned in the first reply here, perhaps could be, re-evaluated using higher grade component cables.

I do not assume to say this relative to headphones and would be interested in taking a look at what types of cross platform connectivity solutions we might be able to come up with for this segment.

AS most headphones I have used, typicallt AKG's studio sets, the preassembled aspects of thse "cans" precludes actual aftermarket application.

My questions are?

Is there a standard gauge wire in the signal path from the output jack to the speakers?

Is there a preference between 1/4" phone TRS (stereo) or 3.5mm TRS (stereo)?

Thanks for letting me post here.

Rob

Both were the Virtual Dynamics Nite Series. I suspect a design issue with the balanced cable, because the bass response was awful. Switching to the Cardas Golden Reference (balanced), there was more fine detail than the single-ended Nites, but dynamic range appeared constricted. I've got a prototype cable from Virtual Dynamics (single-ended) that has achieved the level of detail of the Cardas cable while maintaining the dynamic range of the Nites...best of both worlds.

no, in most instances, balanced cables (XLR) decrease the sound quality. in order to balance a signal, the original signal has to be put through transformers or other circuitry, which degrades the sound quality. if you are not running a complex system and do not have much interference in the environment, balanced connections are theoretically not desirable.

that said.... if you have long cable runs, or you have many components, then you might want to use balanced cables for various reasons rob pointed out. balanced cables were developed for the professional community, which has demands a home enthusiast would never encounter.

if you just have one source, one preamp, and one amp.... well, don't waste your money.

Besides looking at the cable it is also dependent on the design of the component. There may be a difference between full designed components and there may not. You'll have gear that will run better with a balanced connection while you'll have gear that runs better with single ended connection.

Generally balanced cables lowers the noice floor and is thus recommended however some find single ended cables to be more dynamic and thus prefer it. It is subjective indeed.

i disagree with that statement. no, balanced cables do not GENERALLY lower noise floor. not when we're talking about home systems. yes when you have more equipment... but no in simple systems.

you are right that it depends on the design. but even in the most extreme of designs where one complete amp is used for each phase, bypassing transformers and other balancing ciruitry, you STILL have double the circuitry necessary compared to an unbalanced signal. there's no way around it as far as i know. i ain't an e.e. major, but i don't think you need special knowledge to see that putting more in the signal path for the soul purpose of balancing a signal will result in a lower sound quality.

again, there are many benefits of balanced signals, but these benefits don't help the home enthusiast much.

(incidentally, Hirsch's observations support my argument.)

An XLR connection does not always imply a balanced circuit.

in most of the big time high-end audio gear (all wadia players/dacs, cary 306/200, and the likes of it) phase inversion aka balancing is performed in the digital domain. positive and inverted components of the signal are then processed independently of each other for as long as it makes sense to. in fact, in most cases in order to obtain an unbalanced output signal, the balanced signal has to go through an additional differential amplifier and a buffer.

zzz,

Are you saying that in the higher end gear that the balanced outputs sound better than the unbalanced? At least when the unbalanced go thru more processing to bring the signal to that unbalanced state.

I ask as I just got a rather expensive balanced source in hopes that it would provide a cleaner and better sounding signal. The review in Stereo Times says that the balanced in my unit is a bit better than the unbalanced, so I will now have to see for myself once I get the Balanced Gilmore Premier next year. I thought that the balanced outputs were better than the single ended, but have never heard anything above Hirsch's Creek CD53, so I can't speak from too much experience.

well, I'd be lying if I said I knew, as I have never had a chance to compare one to another just yet. I simply had to mention that the implementation of balanced inputs/outputs does not have to be nearly as bad as orpheus made it look.

for what it's worth, top of the line pass labs poweramps only have xlr inputs.

well... yes, in your example, using unbalanced cables would definitely sacrificce some sound quality.

however.... why do these pieces of audio gear balance the signal anyway!? ...as you noted, this results in 2x as many components, and thus less accurate sound.

so, what i was saying is, all consumer equipment should have RCA's, not XLR's. it does not make sense to use balanced signals in consumer stuff, as it will always result in lower sound quality if one does not take advantage of a balanced signal's ability to reject noise and to avoid some induced hum.

you see.... the majority of cables used in a simple audio system are maybe 1m in length. maybe a bit longer if you have to. but rarely much longer than 2m. ..........and that's pretty darn short. balanced signals were originally popularized for microphone cables, which often were 50ft all the way to couple hundred feet! at home, in a simple system you'll have maybe 5 components. r components at 1m/pair of interconnects = 10m of cable. .......now, at my house, i estimate about 1/4 MILE!!! of cable.

so.....yes, if you got a lot of components, balanced signals might make a difference. but please don't buy a piece just cause it is balanced when your system is small. XLR cables do not inheritely result in better sound quality. like everything, it's not as simple as it seems.

uhrm. what's your reasoning for the `less accurate sound` thing? if you have two identical blocks of circuitry running side by side processing positive and inverted signals, then the difference between their outputs is 6db larger than either of the outputs but has only 3db more uncorrelated noise, thus right there you effectively get 3db of noise reduction. certain types of distortions/correlated noise cancel each other out (since the stages are presumed to be identical) or at least reduce significantly.

yeah... i guess it would cancel each other out somewhat. my reasoning is that you double the ciruitry.... and of course, any ciruitry results in distortion. but yes, i realize it's more complicated than that.

however, you cannot deny that if such a device did not balance the signal, the signal would be more pure.