The free REW room eq wizard app together with the UMIK is all you'll ever need for just about anything in home audio. REW is an incredible piece of freeware, I throw small a donation to John the developer every so often, it's so worth it.
-
Welcome to ASR. 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!
There is nothing holy about the signal
- Thread starter Keith_W
- Start date
Miguelón
Major Contributor
Thanks again, probably the smartest way is to get the mic and measure prior to buy any other piece of gear. Can be funny also to verify the different reflexions and changes I perceive, and make experiments
Miguelón
Major Contributor
Excuse me by asking again, looking to my future measurement mic and need for new streamer (I don’t use the computer because we share PC and laptop at home, but my girlfriend need both most of time and prefer to have the streamer).
WiiM ultra was my first choice because usb c audio output (my DAC has no SPDIF input) but it costs 400€.
WiiM Pro Plus is now 250€ so I can save money to the mic, and Amir’s review showed good performances as a DAC.
My question is about the possibility of connecting that WiiM Pro Plus unbalanced RCA outputs to the balanced XLR inputs: no problem for cables, they are a lot on the market but should I expect a decrease in quality or in SPL that cannot be compensated with gain input on the amp?
As voltage is half on the unbalanced outputs (2 volts by specs) I guess increasing gain output by 6 dB should give the same results but I’m not sure…
solderdude
Grand Contributor
You can connect RCA out to XLR input.
It requires a cable with the XLR pins 2 and 3 tied together.
This will mean that to reach the same volume you need 6dB more gain in the amp or 6dB higher output voltage of the DAC.
A downside could be that a possible ground loop could become audible (hum, weird noises) but in most cases this remains below audible levels.
In such a case an audio line transformer (good ones exist) can solve these issues and transform RCA to XLR without the 6dB loss.
Another option could be to use a powered DI box that converts RCA to balanced. Those can have lower distortion and wider bandwidth.
It requires a cable with the XLR pins 2 and 3 tied together.
This will mean that to reach the same volume you need 6dB more gain in the amp or 6dB higher output voltage of the DAC.
A downside could be that a possible ground loop could become audible (hum, weird noises) but in most cases this remains below audible levels.
In such a case an audio line transformer (good ones exist) can solve these issues and transform RCA to XLR without the 6dB loss.
Another option could be to use a powered DI box that converts RCA to balanced. Those can have lower distortion and wider bandwidth.
Last edited:
Miguelón
Major Contributor
Thanks again! No issue for rising DAC volume or gain: I’m actually using my DAC/pre amp volume at 9-10 o’clock so probably 6 dB more get around 12. Gain is settled at 0 dB on Genelecs, and can be raised + 6 dB if necessary.
Time ago I connected directly my computer jack output to a home version of the Genelecs (is the same but more expensive and has RCA inputs and XLR), and I couldn’t find any audible noise but I will search line transformer for the case.
Post Edit: I see, is one of those Neutrik little adapters, good to now, they are relatively cheap
Last edited:
antcollinet
Grand Contributor
It is also possible to construct an RCA to XLR cable that is impedance balanced as described here:
Is it possible to create a balanced RCA to XLR cable?
And if so, is there anything "less" balanced about such a cable than a mini-XLR to XLR cable? I'm asking in the context of Pro-Ject turntables, as I decide between two different models, one with and one without a mini-XLR output. Finally, if such a cable is possible, is there anything I...
audiosciencereview.com
This will provide most (or all if you use the balancing resistor in the 0V connection) of the ground loop noise rejection.
You can use a basic cable first and only change to this type if you experience ground loop noise.
Miguelón
Major Contributor
If I understand correctly, the resistor aims to provide similar noise amplitude on both cables, with adapting the impedance to the output, and then canceling the noise by shifting phase at 180 degrees at the XLR input circuit.It is also possible to construct an RCA to XLR cable that is impedance balanced as described here:
Is it possible to create a balanced RCA to XLR cable?
And if so, is there anything "less" balanced about such a cable than a mini-XLR to XLR cable? I'm asking in the context of Pro-Ject turntables, as I decide between two different models, one with and one without a mini-XLR output. Finally, if such a cable is possible, is there anything I...
This will provide most (or all if you use the balancing resistor in the 0V connection) of the ground loop noise rejection.
You can use a basic cable first and only change to this type if you experience ground loop noise.
A standard cable doesn’t provide any particular resistor so the noise amplitude at both cables won’t be the same and cannot be cancelled by superposing them after shifting.
Do the Neutrik line transformer make the same job? I guess that Z output varies from devices
antcollinet
Grand Contributor
More or less.
Yes, the transformer will work just as well (or better) from a noise point of view. The issue with a transformer is they are expensive if you want flat response from 20Hz to 20Khz. I have no idea how flat the Neutrik device is.
Miguelón
Major Contributor
It seem it’s exactly the same setup that the one from the post, a passive transformer from RCA to XLR with a 200 ohms resistor. Don’t introduce any amplification so has to be flat
antcollinet
Grand Contributor
No, any transformer has a limited bandwidth depending on construction, core materials etc. Amplification has nothing to do with it.
For example - here is one that manages 30Hz to 15KHz, to within 1.5dB
Last edited:
Miguelón
Major Contributor
Can do better perhaps than Neutrik version, usually is a well considered cheap solution to balanced- unbalanced lines, also was suggested to me by other members when considering Genelecs 8330 and need spdif to Aes/ebu adapter.
I will see a couple of options if simple cables will be noisy.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,283
- Likes
- 17,765
Facts are facts, and BS is BS.
You know, facts as in the what can be proven thru measurements and supported with repeatable evidence like DBT and such..
Subjective unsupported claims of the removed veils, changed tonality, and soundstage dimensionality is the BS that the snakeoil high end community uses to sucker the folks and empty the contents of their deep pockets.
If being one of P. T. Barnum's suckers is a audiophools goal, he can find pleasure aplenty from traveling that path.
All of which is the usual buffet of red herrings, in terms of missing the point of what I wrote.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,283
- Likes
- 17,765
I certainly agree that the majority agrees with the thing I disagree with
I just saw that I grabbed the wrong quote from Miguelon. My response above was actually to:
Miguelón
Major Contributor
I don’t know exactly what they are, but still think majority of us prefer audio transparency unless they can’t obtain it.
Not saying that is the best goal: if I could state or demonstrate that, the holy thread about the signal (or the thread about the hole on signal, or the whole signal of thread) was finished.
As I understood, majority of members consider the signal as similar to the source as possible and after make some voluntary modifications for room corrections or just for pleasure.
What seem to be a nonsense is to voluntary choose a piece of gear that distorts, because one cannot probably undo the process: will always carry the harmonics.
Or perhaps is not a nonsense, but is a minority choice (for me as illogical as buying a camera with a non transparent objective that you can’t leave if you want)
solderdude
Grand Contributor
An alternative for a transformer and would likely do the trick when a simple cable is not working properly:
www.thomann.de
www.thomann.de
ART Dualxdirect
Actieve dual DI Box Kan worden bediend via phantom power of 9V batterij, Het inkomende signaal via de hoog-ohmige, ongebalanceerd jack en gebalanceerd XLR aansluiting, wordt omgezet in een geïsoleerd, gebalanceerd en lage-ohmig signaal, Ground lift...
www.thomann.de
ART Cleanbox Pro
2-kanaals niveau converter Voor conversie van twee niet-symmetrische kanalen in twee symmetrische kanalen en vice versa, Laag ruis- en vervorming circuit, XLR-aansluitingen voor gebalanceerde ingangen en uitgangen, RCA-aansluitingen en stereo...
www.thomann.de
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,283
- Likes
- 17,765
Yes, that’s what I was responding to. When we are talking about possibly pleasant distortions in our systems, the common view here is that you should start with a totally neutral system, and then if you want to add any form of distortion you can do so with EQ or possibly plug-ins if you’re looking for a tube like distortion .
This is of course, an entirely sensible approach.
I only push back a little bit when it is presented as the ONLY sensible approach.
As I constantly argue: a sensible approach depends on the individual. There’s no one size fit’s all sensible approach.
Yes, a minority approach. At least in terms of this forum.
Within this context , I’ve explained/defended my choice of using old tube amps but here it goes again in case it is of interest to you:
1. I like gear, how it looks and how it feels, and for me tube amps are just cool! Always have been. I love the way they look. I like the concept. I like the connection to the history of audio that they represent. To me virtually all solid state amplifiers are just utilitarian boxes.
They don’t do a thing for me, aesthetically or conceptually. Whereas I swear whenever I fire up my old tube amps I still feel kind of giddy and love the glowing tubes. So right off the bat, that’s something that I’m not going to get from the type of system most here think is “the right way to do things.”
2 I personally enjoy some level of personal input in the sound of my system. In other words, my goal isn’t some totally neutral system that will sound just like your neutral system. I’m looking to participate somewhat in achieving exactly the sound that I want to hear.
That brings us back to: well then why not start with a neutral system - usually meaning solid state - and EQ it to your hearts content or add VST plug-ins if you want to like distortion? Then you can turn them on and off too!
Why not? Because for one thing, as I said, I really like tube amps! The above simply would not actually give me a tube amp.
Further, I have also had solid state amplifiers in my system on and off over the years, if not for long, as well as a digital parametric EQ. I tried a few times, but never could duplicate the sound I perceived from my tube amps just by using EQ with a solid amp. And I have no interest whatsoever and trying to introduce awkward VST’s into my system. Yuck. Which also are not guaranteed to replicate the sound I already know I like in the particularly tube amps I own.
3. The flexibility to turn the distortion on and off is only a big plus if you actually end up wanting to turn it off. But I don’t want to turn it off. I’ve never wanted to turn off the distortion from my tube amps. The reason I got them is that I love how everything sounds played via the tube amps! No need for fiddling, for me it’s a set and forget solution for the sound I tried to achieve. Along with all the aesthetic and conceptual aspects, the tube amp gives me.
4. Ultimately the level of distortion from my tube amps is subtle. It’s significant to me, but in the big picture is not nearly enough distortion to “make everything sound the same” or override the different Sonic characteristics of recordings. So I’m not worried that I’m denying myself insight into how the different recordings sound, which is something I also appreciate.
So with all that said, I hope that you can appreciate that while it certainly wouldn’t be a solution you would select, this alternative approach does make sense for my taste and goals. I’ve been thrilled with my amps for 25 years!
And a great many other audiophiles, though typically not ones who would join us site like this, have found great pleasure, and success in this non-ASR approach of putting the distortion wherever they want it.
(Which can be acknowledged without endorsing every woo thing audiophiles believe)
Last edited:
Matt
What model C-J do you have ??
What model C-J do you have ??
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,283
- Likes
- 17,765
Premier 12 mono blocks - 140w/side.
Here’s the one that sits atop one rack. (The other one is on the floor beneath another rack)
Also CJ Premier 16 LS2 tube preamp, which can be spotted midway down the far rack here:
I had both tube and solid state amps and preamps from C-J, wish I still had them. But I really like the Benchmark amps and preamps, I currently have
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,283
- Likes
- 17,765
Cool. As it happens I also use a Benchmark LA4 preamp! I wondered if I could wean myself off the tube preamp (especially during the tube shortage). Loved what the benchmark brought to the system, but couldn’t part with what I loved about the CJ preamp so I’ve kept them both.
