Classic level mismatch.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Balanced vs unbalanced
- Thread starter wsdc
- Start date
AnalogSteph
Major Contributor
I would suspect the same.
As in most DACs with both balanced and unbalanced outputs, the balanced one is 6 dB louder in the 200M.
Specs for the C52 are confusing in that they seem to imply a constant gain regardless of input and output combo. While that seems unlikely, it would mean that the same 6 dB level difference would carry over to the output. That in turn would make any valid A-B comparisons impossible - the goal for listening tests tends to be level matching to 0.1 dB. If you can't get anywhere close, you'll be comparing apples and oranges.
In most cases, balanced output stages actually have a 6 dB gain (hence why it is this way in the DAC), so normally I would expect this to be offset by a -6 dB gain in the balanced input stage at most. If so, both DAC connections should actually be equally loud. (Some devices don't even go to the trouble of compensating for output stage gain, so overall gain with balanced I/O ends up being 6 dB higher... that would make the DAC via XLR 12 dB louder even.)
You should be able to determine which one is true by ear easily enough, a 6 dB level difference or lack thereof between XLR and RCA connections should be quite obvious.
As in most DACs with both balanced and unbalanced outputs, the balanced one is 6 dB louder in the 200M.
Specs for the C52 are confusing in that they seem to imply a constant gain regardless of input and output combo. While that seems unlikely, it would mean that the same 6 dB level difference would carry over to the output. That in turn would make any valid A-B comparisons impossible - the goal for listening tests tends to be level matching to 0.1 dB. If you can't get anywhere close, you'll be comparing apples and oranges.
In most cases, balanced output stages actually have a 6 dB gain (hence why it is this way in the DAC), so normally I would expect this to be offset by a -6 dB gain in the balanced input stage at most. If so, both DAC connections should actually be equally loud. (Some devices don't even go to the trouble of compensating for output stage gain, so overall gain with balanced I/O ends up being 6 dB higher... that would make the DAC via XLR 12 dB louder even.)
You should be able to determine which one is true by ear easily enough, a 6 dB level difference or lack thereof between XLR and RCA connections should be quite obvious.
I totally understand everyone will say balanced. But my concern is why unbalanced sound more details and clear when listening to songs with the instruments like hi-hat (those chit chit sound lol).
When playing back with XLR. It doesn't make the instrument sound as clear. Does anyone know why ? Don't get me wrong, XLR sound good but clarity seems little not as sharp compare to unbalanced.
Your levels are likely not matched when you compared.
Level match. Level match. Level match.
Same reasons why CDs are still around wen in the professional recording world >192/24 is used.
1. It so "good enough" for most consumer.
2. its cheaper.
3. there are a lots of myths and miss information around.
4. Coping from old farts.
(this is a very conservative and old community)
Remember when HD came around and all this nerds " i don’t see no difference!" the same wen 4K, 10-bit, HFR...
It is the same thinning of "I invested so much in my VHS collection and Sony Trinitron CRT... it cant be that technology moved on and my investment became obsolete and irrelevant"
Same with this Audiophiles with there Redbook bible and crappy RCA plugs.
Every time a new Phone, PlayStation, computer,etc comes out there are very vocal people hating it passionately telling you how bad it is and what a rippoff..
Most of the time this are the People who just bought the previous generation
Speedskater
Major Contributor
The other reason for a real audible difference is:
In some situations, RCA interconnects can have more background noise/interference.
Sometimes audiophiles enjoy this added background noise.
John Atkinson @Stereophile magazine wrote:
Background Noise
I think that what the listener perceives with this cable is that at low levels, the sound is fattened and made more coherent-sounding by the dominant second-harmonic distortion. In addition, the presence of background noise cannot be dismissed, as there is some evidence that introducing small amounts of random noise results in a sound that is preferred by listeners. At higher signal levels, transients are accompanied by bursts of higher harmonics. However, these subside as quickly as they appeared. The overall effect is to render the system sound as being more vivid,
John Atkinson
August 2005
Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/content/...nterconnects-measurements#UwFYHhApDjzYdDzK.99
* * * * * * * * *
Others have suggested that some background noise may be perceived as added sparkle or detail.
In some situations, RCA interconnects can have more background noise/interference.
Sometimes audiophiles enjoy this added background noise.
John Atkinson @Stereophile magazine wrote:
Background Noise
I think that what the listener perceives with this cable is that at low levels, the sound is fattened and made more coherent-sounding by the dominant second-harmonic distortion. In addition, the presence of background noise cannot be dismissed, as there is some evidence that introducing small amounts of random noise results in a sound that is preferred by listeners. At higher signal levels, transients are accompanied by bursts of higher harmonics. However, these subside as quickly as they appeared. The overall effect is to render the system sound as being more vivid,
John Atkinson
August 2005
Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/content/...nterconnects-measurements#UwFYHhApDjzYdDzK.99
* * * * * * * * *
Others have suggested that some background noise may be perceived as added sparkle or detail.
There shouldn’t be much debate that differential signals are more noise immune than single ended ones. I can’t see why anyone would question that.
Were I starting over, I would adopt it.
The real question is whether or not your circumstance would benefit noticeably by changing everything.
I suspect that’s a question with no generic answer?
Were I starting over, I would adopt it.
The real question is whether or not your circumstance would benefit noticeably by changing everything.
I suspect that’s a question with no generic answer?
I think that for the average home audio setup where small signal cables rarely exceed 3' in length, a balanced cable setup simply isn't needed, and it just adds unnecessary complexity. Most consumer gear does not come with balanced inputs & outputs anyway. For long cable runs, such as those in studios, balanced connection is the way to go.
SOUNDSONIC
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2021
- Messages
- 245
- Likes
- 190
Got a SMSL SU9 and SMSL DA9. Great combo. They are connected to each with both XLR and RCA cables I intermitently switched the XLR and RCA while listening to few genres of music. Well, Ive heard no difference.
https://chord.co.uk/xlr-vs-rca/
https://chord.co.uk/xlr-vs-rca/
I’m sorry, I’m just seeing this a year late, but pentaconn connectors are perfectly comparable to XLR, don’t make you fuss with getting them plugged in right side up, and are a lot less clunky to deal with in my view. And I think it’s high time to create an analogous term for Godwin’s law that replaces mentioning “Hitler’ with “MQA”
solderdude
Grand Contributor
Pentaconn connector was launched in 2015.
It's now almost 7 years later.
Only very few headphones come with Pentaconn connectors and not many equipment has a Pentaconn socket.
Most headphones come with the ages old 3.5 and/or 6.3 TRS jacks.
When balanced cables are sold with it they usually are either 2.5mm TRRS or 4 pin XLR.
For balanced these are already adopted as a standard.
It is starting to catch on a bit but only when all equipment uses Pentaconn I don't see all headphones being fitted with the Pentaconn plug.
That said the Pentaconn plug is much more useful than the TRS and XLR 4-pin and 2.5TRRS jack though.
It is just barely bigger than 3.5mm TRS, it can be used single ended and balanced.
Phones are getting rid of analog connectors instead of adopting the Pentaconn which doesn't help.
For DIYers it is not easy to buy PCB or free Pentaconn sockets (nor plugs) and they are rather expensive and not available through the obvious channels to buy. This doesn't help spread the Pentaconn plug either.
So really it is a solution for something that has already been solved (kind of). The idea is great to use 1 plug for all types of HP connections and small enough to be used in portable gear but just like MQA it is kind of too late and not widely adopted by manufacturers and the public.
Would have loved to see it catch on as it could save everyone the countless discussions as to what to connect to what, what adapters can be used and which not, no bulky connectors etc.
Maybe in the coming 10 years ago it might catch on ?
It's now almost 7 years later.
Only very few headphones come with Pentaconn connectors and not many equipment has a Pentaconn socket.
Most headphones come with the ages old 3.5 and/or 6.3 TRS jacks.
When balanced cables are sold with it they usually are either 2.5mm TRRS or 4 pin XLR.
For balanced these are already adopted as a standard.
It is starting to catch on a bit but only when all equipment uses Pentaconn I don't see all headphones being fitted with the Pentaconn plug.
That said the Pentaconn plug is much more useful than the TRS and XLR 4-pin and 2.5TRRS jack though.
It is just barely bigger than 3.5mm TRS, it can be used single ended and balanced.
Phones are getting rid of analog connectors instead of adopting the Pentaconn which doesn't help.
For DIYers it is not easy to buy PCB or free Pentaconn sockets (nor plugs) and they are rather expensive and not available through the obvious channels to buy. This doesn't help spread the Pentaconn plug either.
So really it is a solution for something that has already been solved (kind of). The idea is great to use 1 plug for all types of HP connections and small enough to be used in portable gear but just like MQA it is kind of too late and not widely adopted by manufacturers and the public.
Would have loved to see it catch on as it could save everyone the countless discussions as to what to connect to what, what adapters can be used and which not, no bulky connectors etc.
Maybe in the coming 10 years ago it might catch on ?
Last edited:
Everything in hifi is a fad.
Similar threads
