[andyschaub]

The whole ‘balanced vs SE’ is pretty non-sensical for home audio anyway. Balanced connections were intended, and designed, to reject RFI interference over long-lengths of cable. Since we’re invariably dealing with very short cable lengths, the the whole debate becomes irrelevant.
BUT where the TT is concerned, IMO SE/RCA outputs sound demonstrably better than XLR. And, according to the DAC’s designer, there’s a very good reason why that would the case.

I agree with your comment about the TT, but the balanced comment is not spot-on. Many components use a balanced topology that then requires balanced versus single-ended cables and vice versa; plus some SE components are transformer-coupled and sound best with balanced cables; it all depends.

 

[odessamarin]

... this is schematic representation how i do hear the difference.
as you see there is nothing about clarity, buss, mids, highs. transparency.. it's not an issue at all..
its all about instrument positions and separation. This parameters has nothing to do with music and frequency response actually.. BUT it really depends in timimg, phase resolution.. this is how our brains interprets distance and deeps. And somehow, fully balance path I proposed do a real magic there. I am so much wish someboduy can try it and report.. hopefully somebody will.



And, as you see, if you never able to hear it as it on the XLR part... you could be happy with RCA all your life! See what i mean.. ? RCA as you see it's not bad.. it has depth at some extend BUT after you get XLR image.. no way back. At least I have this experience.

Actually, I am so sure what i am saying.. here is my bet.
Any of you who has Hugo TT and fine headphones with balanced XLR cable, go to trade thread, pick up Bryston BHA-1 (there are some for 700-800) and try.
Now, if you don't hear what i mean or prefere RCA or even no differance.., I will buy Brystone from you for 100 more.
But, if you decide to keep it, because you hear XLR how i describe it, you pay me 100.
Deal?.. let's have fun... I will keep my word. Promise.
Also promise it will blow your mind!

 

[x RELIC x]

The thing is, is that the TT is a single-ended DAC IN DESIGN. To enable balanced outputs, more electronics need to be inserted into the signal path, which invariably impacts negatively on the SQ.
It’s pretty simple really: Balanced on the TT sounds inferior to SE.

Since you quoted me I feel obligated to reply, especially since it seems like you are saying I don't agree with you - which is not the case as evidenced in my post you quoted. Simply, you don't need to tell me this, I know it all to well. Less components in the signal path will measure better, have higher fidelity (accuracy to the source) and typically that's what I, personally, look for.

However, there's also human preferences at play. To say something sounds inferior is a gross over simplification. Balanced may perform inferior, even to a very minor degree (audible?), but if a user wants/needs/prefers to use the balanced outputs then they are there for them and they provide a crap load of power for efficient speakers (IMO, SE is more than enough for every headphone).

Edit: I was mistaken in the last part... Thought I was reading the TT2 thread.

 

[x RELIC x]

... this is schematic representation how i do hear the difference.
as you see there is nothing about clarity, buss, mids, highs. transparency.. it's not am issue at all..
its all about instrument positions and separation. This parameters has nothing to do with music and frequency response actually.. BUT it really depends in timimg, phase resolution.. this is how our brains interprets distance and deeps. And somehow, fully balance path I proposed do a real magic there. I am so much wish someboduy can try it and report.. hopefully somebody will.



And, as you see, if you never able to hear it as it on the XLR part... you could be happy with RCA all your life! See what i mean.. ? RCA as you see it's not bad.. it has depth at some extend BUT after you get XLR image.. no way back. At least I have this experience.

Actually, I am so sure what i am saying.. here is my bet.
Any of you who has Hugo TT and fine headphones with balanced XLR cable, go to trade thread, pick up Bryston BHA-1 (there are some for 700-800) and try.
Now, if you don't hear what i mean or prefere RCA or even no differance.., I will bay Brystone from you for 100 more.
But, if you decide to keep it, because you hear XLR how i describe it, you pay me 100.
Deal?

My apologies if I missed it, but did you volume match the outputs from the TT for comparison? That's the only way to tell if there is an actual difference because louder ALWAYS sounds 'better' to the human brain, even slightly louder (0.5dB). Also, it could be that with the Bryston in the mix you are simply hearing the better XLR topology of the amp when connecting the TT to the XLR inputs.

The only way to narrow down the differences between the TT outputs is to connect the transducer directly to the XLR and SE for comparison (with the external amp out of the equation) and volume match between sources.

 

[odessamarin]

My apologies if I missed it, but did you volume match the outputs from the TT for comparison?

Yes, sure.. there is very small difference, but to be sure I increased volume on RCA to be in pair..I also did RCA even louder... but you just hear XLR is deeper an more correct representation. In my scheme it one plane horizontal representation, but it also opens up and down on balanced. It hard to explain.. it's like if you close your eyes you have feeling that you can touch singer or instruments.. like sounds take the volume..not flat anymore... need to hear it once really.

Also, it could be that with the Bryston in the mix you are simply hearing the better XLR topology of the amp when connecting the TT to the XLR inputs.

yes.. this is very truth. agree.. could be. only other amp i have is valves MAD Ear +HD.. Normal RCA input.. yes it give some tube magic.. but nothing close to balanced Bryston.
But other way make me feels i am correct in conclussions.. is that even Hugo TT headphones out (which is excellent i would say) sounds boring in compare Bryston XLR (cant believe i am saying this..)
Also, I had bryston for a years, it was okey.. from Hugo, Mojo.. Fiio daps... all rca line out. Nothing special. But when i connected Huggo TT trough XLR.. BUUUM it start sounds MAGIC!!! not a coincidence i would say.

 

[JaZZ]

Since your Bryston BHA-1 is a headphone amp with balanced topology, it needs a balanced signal to work. Fed by the Hugo TT – a DAC with single-ended topology – the signal has to be converted to balanced somewhere. Either through the Hugo TT or through the Bryston itself. Now your listening experience confirms that the Hugo TT does a better job at balancing the signal than the Bryston, so the case is closed. It's exactly as Rob Watts has stated in some of his earlier posts: You have to try which variant sounds better. In any event, balancing requires some additional electronics components in the signal path, which is detrimental to sound quality – on the other hand unavoidable in your case, if you want the amp to stay within your system. You are aware that it represents another (massive!) complication of the signal path, right? Since the Hugo TT's output stage (headphone out and line out in one) can't be bypassed. So the sonic benefit from the Bryston is a matter of personal preference, not objective superiority. Objectively it introduces colorations (caused mainly by added harmonic distortion) – otherwise it would sound the same as the TT's headphone out. In my experience those amplifier colorations have the ability to mask the flaws in a chain, particularly uneven amplitude responses of sound transducers, and particularly if they lack (low) bass or show aggressive spikes. The downside of this cure is reduced transparency.

 

[odessamarin]

@JaZZ

No. You came to Milano, I make you hear what I mean, and you offer me a dinner! Because you are wrong, and it will change all what you heard up to know..
If you will hear nothing.. so i am wrong and dinner on me. This is how case can be closed. Otherwise.. bla bla.. shame with all you cool staff from signature you cant even imagine what i am talking about.. proposing coloration and path simplicity staff. I know what you mean, and it is has nothing to do with difference i hear and talking about.

PS if i am wrong, also I pay you a trip!

 

[JaZZ]

What headphone(s) are you using, odessamarin? Your profile is (still) empty.

 

[odessamarin]

@JaZZ

LCD-3, and I replaced jack for Grado GS1000 to balanced XLR.. just to confirm also dynamics headphone can do this magic.. and it's just gorgeous.
Believe me.. it worth we meet! you will see!

 

[kelly200269]

Since your Bryston BHA-1 is a headphone amp with balanced topology, it needs a balanced signal to work. Fed by the Hugo TT – a DAC with single-ended topology – the signal has to be converted to balanced somewhere. Either through the Hugo TT or through the Bryston itself. Now your listening experience confirms that the Hugo TT does a better job at balancing the signal than the Bryston, so the case is closed. It's exactly as Rob Watts has stated in some of his earlier posts: You have to try which variant sounds better. In any event, balancing requires some additional electronics components in the signal path, which is detrimental to sound quality – on the other hand unavoidable in your case, if you want the amp to stay within your system. You are aware that it represents another (massive!) complication of the signal path, right? Since the Hugo TT's output stage (headphone out and line out in one) can't be bypassed. So the sonic benefit from the Bryston is a matter of personal preference, not objective superiority. Objectively it introduces colorations (caused mainly by added harmonic distortion) – otherwise it would sound the same as the TT's headphone out. In my experience those amplifier colorations have the ability to mask the flaws in a chain, particularly uneven amplitude responses of sound transducers, and particularly if they lack (low) bass or show aggressive spikes. The downside of this cure is reduced transparency.

Thank you. Absolutely spot-on. I couldn’t have said it better.

 

[miketlse]

@JaZZ

No. You came to Milano, I make you hear what I mean, and you offer me a dinner! Because you are wrong, and it will change all what you heard up to know..
If you will hear nothing.. so i am wrong and dinner on me. This is how case can be closed. Otherwise.. bla bla.. shame with all you cool staff from signature you cant even imagine what i am talking about.. proposing coloration and path simplicity staff. I know what you mean, and it is has nothing to do with difference i hear and talking about.

PS if i am wrong, also I pay you a trip!

@JaZZ it looks like a free winter break to Milan is on offer. Are you tempted?

 

[odessamarin]

@JaZZ it looks like a free winter break to Milan is on offer. Are you tempted?

Wish he accept it!

 

[Whazzzup]

I have done to many changes to my rig since my original a/b that have tweaked music harmony to state anything absolute from memory. Balanced is just the path I chose to follow, against chords se edicts.

 

[JaZZ]

Sorry for the late response!

@JaZZ

LCD-3, and I replaced jack for Grado GS1000 to balanced XLR.. just to confirm also dynamics headphone can do this magic.. and it's just gorgeous.
Believe me.. it worth we meet! you will see!

I do believe you that it sounds better in the balanced configuration – see my reasoning above. On the other hand, my personal sonic ideal would without a doubt dictate the direct connection to the TT's headphone out. This although it may unmask that the over-all response isn't as perfect as I would like it. I know the GS1000 quite a bit – actually I've auditioned (and owned) a few Grados, but never could get over their colorations due to relatively massive amplitude-response and harmonic distortion. I've once auditioned the LCD-3 briefly, liked it, but couldn't draw any definitive conclusion without a reference at hand. In any event I wouldn't try to test the «objective» capability (= accuracy & neutrality) of an amp on the basis of headphones with such uneven frequency balances.

You may know the saying of the ideal amplifier being a «wire with gain» – an unachievable goal, since electronics components inevitably color the sound. Well, Chord DACs offer a passable, virtually equal alternative: the possibility to use a wire without gain instead. Both of your above-mentioned headphones have such a high sensitivity that they can be driven to ear-bleeding levels (and maybe even voice-coil/conductor-path destruction), which means that any further gain stage is an absurd solution, apart from the massive amount of electronics parts it places into the signal part. If you believe Rob that even solder joints have an audible impact, you would be hard-pressed to advocate a complete amplifier attached to the «headphone output» with the goal to increase the gain further, just to finally decrease it again to get ear-compatible levels. That's not to say that it can't sound good nonetheless, but it's not the path to high fidelity. The latter would consist of a signal path as direct as possible combined with a headphone with minimal harmonic distortion and (particularly!) absolutely flat amplitude response. Since the latter doesn't exist, I have developed the habit of equalizing my headphones as perfectly as it gets – to (perceivedly) flat from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. I'm aware that this procedure isn't practicable for everyone, but there are tools such as Sonarworks that do a good job if you don't feel like making your own EQ attempts, and be it just for the start.

Long story short: I stick to my notion that severe flaws in a hi-fi chain (focus on sound transducers!) call for masking electronics. That's why I had to redesign (or fine-tune) the crossover networks of my speaker prototypes – during my extended speaker-building area some years ago – after replacing my Conrad Johnson PV 6 preamp with a passive resistor-ladder attenuator. And after switching the Hugo M Scaler into my chain I had to rework the EQ curves for all my headphones. Ultimate signal accuracy is relatively unforgiving in terms of downstream flaws. So again, I believe you that you get the best result with the Bryston via balanced connection and balanced headphone drive, but it's not the best solution if you really want to know what's hidden in a recording – just a makeshift on the basis of the gear at hand. But thanks anyway for your kind invitation! I'm sure you are a nice person.

@JaZZ it looks like a free winter break to Milan is on offer. Are you tempted?

Yeah, or rather no – winter in Milan is still winter.

 

[miketlse]

If anyone is thinking of treating themselves to a TT for Christmas, AudioSanctuary have a good deal on them at the moment.
https://www.audiosanctuary.co.uk/chord-hugo-tt-desktop-dac-headphone-amplifier.html