In this case we have 2 ES9038Q2M stereo DAC modules, one is generating two identical Left channels the other two identical Right channels, then the signal path continues in this fashion. If it was an unbalanced design it would have been only 2 channels in the signal path.
So where I was coming from yesterday is that given this, is there not an additional step in producing the unbalanced signal by combining the above, whereas you spoke about additional steps to produced the balanced output. Just explaining why, following your logic, I suggested it might be an inherently unbalanced design. The change in non-mains noise levels is what it is either way but I still think its interesting it's higher for the balanced outputs. (We're talking about what looks like a 5 dB change across the board here for people who haven't checked back to the original graphs.)
I personally think that in a professional or enthusiasts product at least a balanced connection (not end-to-end design) should be mandatory.
Agreed. It has actually frustrated me for years that balanced connections aren't the standard across consumer audio products, since it is just inherently better from a technical perspective than unbalanced connections.
badyard said:
Also get Proel Bulk cables or other professional affordable cables if you don't have money to throw at hyped audiophile cable brands.
Avoid cheap unknown alternatives and you'll be good!
Don't worry there is zero danger of me buying expensive audiophile cables. I went down that rabbit hole 10-15 years ago, but I'm better now
. I mostly make my own cables now but I did order a couple of balanced cables last night, made with van Damme cable and Neutrik connectors that I think should be fine. What I'm less confident about sourcing is a well-matched pair of XLR in-line attenuators, since none of the ones I've found so far quote any sort of tolerance. I obviously want to avoid introducing a channel level imbalance into the stereo signal.
Does anyone have any recommendations of XLR attenuators to use?