advertisement


‘Unbalanced is Best'? a comparison of balanced and unbalanced

Unless you're an engineer you are in no position to agree or disagree (that applies to just about everything on hi fi fora!). If you think the thread is about interconnects or power leads you may even be on the wrong thread!

That's me out of this thread anyway. As usual no one is interested in facts or indeed in anything that actually matters. It is, as are almost all threads on all fora, about trolling and to give people who half understood a badly written and technically wrong magazine article or "something I read somewhere" to show off just how little they understand the entire concept...
Jeez, talk about pompous! But he won't see this as he's out.
Watch this space.:p
 
Comparing the excellent VFM Yannis Tome cables between my Rega Isis CD and Pass Labs XP-20..
The XLR was noticeably better than RCA
 
Unless you're an engineer you are in no position to agree or disagree
Surprise!

(that applies to just about everything on hi fi fora!). If you think the thread is about interconnects or power leads you may even be on the wrong thread!
This thread is about the reported differences experienced between the use of balanced and single ended interconnects between components that support both. Duckdorp brought up some absurd interconnects and associated nonsense, but that's a side issue.

That's me out of this thread anyway. As usual no one is interested in facts or indeed in anything that actually matters. It is, as are almost all threads on all fora, about trolling and to give people who half understood a badly written and technically wrong magazine article or "something I read somewhere" to show off just how little they understand the entire concept...
Jolly good.
 
Unless you're an engineer you are in no position to agree or disagree (that applies to just about everything on hi fi fora!). If you think the thread is about interconnects or power leads you may even be on the wrong thread!

That's me out of this thread anyway. As usual no one is interested in facts or indeed in anything that actually matters. It is, as are almost all threads on all fora, about trolling and to give people who half understood a badly written and technically wrong magazine article or "something I read somewhere" to show off just how little they understand the entire concept...
If I can catch you before you are out of the door, I was wondering whether you could enlighten me on the typical topology for Xlr only active speakers (eg atcs). Would they just be using a balancing transformer input to a typical unbalanced power amp, or something else.
 
ATCs have an op-amp based input (the 'discrete' versions have similar topology I think). Good old NE5532 types IIRC.
 
Yes but if they just used decent mains cables there would not be any 'noise' to worry about.:rolleyes:

Great article but far too technical for the 'I believe' brigade.

There are some consumer products that have "balanced" inputs with a CMRR of 0 dB. Let's just call these "fake" balanced inputs. The input is equipped with an XLR connector, but the - pin (pin 3) is ignored. These are just unbalanced inputs wired to an XLR connector. They offer no advantage over unbalanced RCA inputs. In most cases, pin 2 of the XLR is tied directly to the center contact of a nearby RCA input. This makes the XLR jack nothing more than an adapter.

Thus helping propagate the beliefs in the OP. that unbalanced is best. Though a ? was added to the thread title later.
 
Jez, unless you're talking about Roman market places, it's FORUMS

And you own the language now, do you?

“The thing that is oft overlooked is that as language changes, the rules that govern it change as well.”

But I’m sure you’ll correct me.

 
Benchmark DAC3

dac3_b10.png
 
The above graphs and the associated articles both outline that the improvments in snr are related to the signal being hotter not the use of balanced.
In fact the article admits that there is a 3db reduction in snr due to the use of balanced that would render it worse but for the +24DBU gain advantage.
Quite aside from the noise performance, the increased component count will increase distortion on the balanced connection, a point also conceded in the article.
 
The above graphs and the associated articles both outline that the improvments in snr are related to the signal being hotter not the use of balanced.
In fact the article admits that there is a 3db reduction in snr due to the use of balanced that would render it worse but for the +24DBU gain advantage.
Quite aside from the noise performance, the increased component count will increase distortion on the balanced connection, a point also conceded in the article.

Interesting. My DAC, a Mytek Brooklyn, has quite hot output levels (4.9v single ended IIRC).

Could this be the best of both worlds considering that I use very short single ended interconnects?
 
Quite aside from the noise performance, the increased component count will increase distortion on the balanced connection, a point also conceded in the article.

I see neither a high component count or high distortion level on my amps.


Key features of the Parallel-86:

  • Ultra-low 0.00012 % THD (1 W, 8 Ω, 1 kHz).
  • Ultra-low 0.00020 % THD (55 W, 8 Ω, 1 kHz).
  • Ultra-low 0.00043 % THD+N (55 W, 8 Ω, 1 kHz).
  • 60 W output power into 8 Ω.
  • 120 W output power into 4 Ω.
  • Ideally suited for high-power amplification.
  • Differential input with nearly 90 dB CMRR eliminates hum and ground loop issues.
  • Phenomenal power supply rejection ensures consistent, high performance even using unregulated power supplies.
  • Elaborate use of planes and copper pours to maximize circuit performance by minimizing supply and ground impedances.
  • Low-inductance signal ground connects to power ground at one point only for maximum performance.
  • On-board Zobel and Thiele networks for maximum stability even with capacitive loads.
  • On-board EMI/RFI input filter and ESD protection.
  • On-board low noise voltage regulators for the driver op-amp and DC servo.
  • Power and output terminal blocks accept wire sizes up to AWG 10 (5.2 mm2).
  • All leaded. Easy to solder. 98 × 85 mm board footprint.
  • Bill-of-materials includes a Mouser Electronics Project Link as well as Digikey part numbers.
An assembled Parallel-86 board is shown below. This is the exact board used for characterization of the circuit and measurements posted here.

PAR86_R1p0_Assembled.jpg
 
I see neither a high component count or high distortion level on my amps.


Key features of the Parallel-86:

  • Ultra-low 0.00012 % THD (1 W, 8 Ω, 1 kHz).
  • Ultra-low 0.00020 % THD (55 W, 8 Ω, 1 kHz).
  • Ultra-low 0.00043 % THD+N (55 W, 8 Ω, 1 kHz).
  • 60 W output power into 8 Ω.
  • 120 W output power into 4 Ω.
  • Ideally suited for high-power amplification.
  • Differential input with nearly 90 dB CMRR eliminates hum and ground loop issues.
  • Phenomenal power supply rejection ensures consistent, high performance even using unregulated power supplies.
  • Elaborate use of planes and copper pours to maximize circuit performance by minimizing supply and ground impedances.
  • Low-inductance signal ground connects to power ground at one point only for maximum performance.
  • On-board Zobel and Thiele networks for maximum stability even with capacitive loads.
  • On-board EMI/RFI input filter and ESD protection.
  • On-board low noise voltage regulators for the driver op-amp and DC servo.
  • Power and output terminal blocks accept wire sizes up to AWG 10 (5.2 mm2).
  • All leaded. Easy to solder. 98 × 85 mm board footprint.
  • Bill-of-materials includes a Mouser Electronics Project Link as well as Digikey part numbers.
An assembled Parallel-86 board is shown below. This is the exact board used for characterization of the circuit and measurements posted here.

PAR86_R1p0_Assembled.jpg

How is it "ideally suited for high power amplification" with max 60w output power at 8ohm?

Or is it just some marketing meaningless talk?
 


advertisement


Back
Top