Keyword is significantly, especially relative to the price of the product.
-
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!
Why is not all audio equipment using "balanced"?
- Thread starter Snoopy
- Start date
A lot of people want RCA. Proposing XLR only is not optimal, believe me. So you need to add balanced connections to SE if you do not want to loose sales.
Takes space. Need switches and/or relays for inputs. I would say that the cost is multiplied by 2 to 4 compared to SE only.
Takes space. Need switches and/or relays for inputs. I would say that the cost is multiplied by 2 to 4 compared to SE only.
If you're doubling the BOM, how do you suppose that translated into retail pricing?
KSTR
Major Contributor
For the complete BOM of a typical device like a preamp or something more simple like a DAC? I think I would doubt that.
As for XLR+RCA combining circuitry, I've used RCA sockets with switching contacts that disconnect the output of an XLR input stage (simple 1 OpAmp circuit) when a cable is plugged in, and from there it goes into a high-Z unbalanced input circuit. Simple and cost-effective, RCA has automatic priority so to say. Not a premium circuit but "good enough" for many use cases.
Agreed with pretty much everything, but want to expand on that last line....And there is no (audio) benefit in most situations.
With a balanced headphone connection you can get twice the voltage with a given power supply voltage but unless you're stuck with USB power it's easier to use a higher voltage power supply. Getting enough power/voltage to drive headphones is child's play compared to driving a speaker.And then you've got an oddball connector.
Regular unbalanced headphone connections ARE standardized as 3.5mm for portable and 1/4-inch for home & pro use. Virtually all other consumer (analog) audio uses RCA or 3.5mm, although the "new" 4-conductor 3.5mm TRRS connector with the additional microphone connection has added confusion.
Virtually all pro equipment uses XLR (with the exception of guitars and headphones).
Keyboards and similar electronic instruments are almost never balanced. Low-level (mic) pro gear is always balanced, as might be any gear that is typically located remotely (long lines are safer balanced, reject main hum and other unwanted electrical noise). I say "might be", because keyboards can require a long run in a studio, but that can be handled with a direct box (or a local mixer with XLR out, typical of stage).
To put it more generally, very low level signals are vulnerable, balanced circuitry lets you reject outside noise (which will be common to both legs, and can be rejected). With higher level signals, they aren't so vulnerable without a lot of distance (if it's truly far, you probably want something between to buffer). But even before we worry about exactly how much distance that would be, there is the simple practicality of it. If you're going to be running cables back to a control room, through walls or ceiling or floor, they will be carrying mic signals, keyboards signals, whatever, so they will all be balanced cables whether they need be or not—zero point in have some connections routed different than others. And the cables (or snakes) are going to get routed once and you're not going to even want to dig for where the noise is coming from, so you might as well ru everything balanced that you can. When you're charging $$$/hr for studio time, you can't be debugging your signal path on the fly, they will go elsewhere. Overdoing the signal path is an incredibly small price to pay.
With consumer gear, your turntable is going to be close to your preamp, which is going to be close to your amp. And if you need to futz with an RCA connection here and there, maybe replace the whole cable if it keeps happening, OK. You're mostly likely not going to change the cabling often.
Last edited:
Obviously no. I was talking about the interface cost.
Cost for cables isnt really an issue. Afterall, many rca/xlr cables are the same (many rca has +ve, ground, foil/braid shield).
The bulk is cost goes to the devices. Its a big jump. You need to include extra input/output for the equipment. Additional circuitry etc...
Almost all the RCA cables I have seen are coaxial with an inner conductor and outer shield, that is shield plus one wire. Some do include an extra ground wire running with the shield but those are the exceptions IME. All the XLR cables comprise an outer shield and inner twisted pair, so shield plus two wires. Again, you can get quad-shield of either type but those are the exceptions rather than the rule. Thus XLR cables usually cost extra because they include an extra wire.
I agree for manufacturers it is the cost in components, board area, rear panel area, etc. that is dominant.
I agree for manufacturers it is the cost in components, board area, rear panel area, etc. that is dominant.
Sort of. It depends if your amp is balanced or unbalanced natively. If it is an unbalanced design, running balanced connections just for balanced connection sake can be a disadvantage.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...asurements-of-accuphase-e-270-amplifier.6220/
Although this is reported as “broken” it is actually is the top Class AB amplifier measured here and for this particular unit, running unbalanced is better as confirmed by the factory specifications too.
Here is the latest list of gear measured so far:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-amplifier.25641/#lg=attachment146428&slide=0
Interesting. That contradicts my experience in a big way. I am confused and wondering where all these are coming from. I have 100+ RCA cables on hand (not counting the hundreds obtained and lost through the years) and can count on one hand, if that, the number that have twin signal conductors. The vast majority are based on basic braided coax as that was cheapest and easiest to buy in bulk. For years it was usually some sort of RG-59 flavor, later (many years ago now) moving to RG-6 as cable and satellite became more prevalent and the heavier cable was used. For a while I worked at a couple of stores, and spoke with a number of manufacturers, and they were all using some sort of RG-59/RG-6 variant.
On which planet is this "bulk cable world" located? I don't think I've ever run across a commercial RCA interconnect that wasn't coaxial. Even the cheesy interconnects that came in the box with $99 off-brand stereo components in the 90's were coaxial. I suppose you could take some speaker wire and solder one together yourself, but maybe you shouldn't do that.
ITs still the same. Its just that they have a separate ground wire instead of using shield as ground. The +ve/ground is usually a twisted pair to give additional noise rejection properties. Some have both foil + braid as shield. But the ground and shield are still soldered together at the source end. This is why some interconnects are directional.
Exactly as escksu says. Twin core wire with braided shield.
A braided shield doesn't make a cable coax, a coax cable has a very specific spacing along the entire length of the cable, usually via an extruded plastic spacer. Calling run of the mill cables, and mutlicore cables that have a braided screen, coax, is inaccurate, its a common mistake, like calling differential amps balanced just because they're not single ended, balanced actually means each phase has equal impedance.
A braided shield doesn't make a cable coax, a coax cable has a very specific spacing along the entire length of the cable, usually via an extruded plastic spacer. Calling run of the mill cables, and mutlicore cables that have a braided screen, coax, is inaccurate, its a common mistake, like calling differential amps balanced just because they're not single ended, balanced actually means each phase has equal impedance.
thefsb
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2019
- Messages
- 796
- Likes
- 657
And/or in settings where the cables are underfoot and susceptible to disconnection due to clumsiness.
Interference
Member
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2018
- Messages
- 88
- Likes
- 112
I am relatively young and naive so I'll try to lay down my impressions about this, and please correct me if I got something wrong.
Back in the days the standard in hi-fi was having class II (dual insulation) devices that were fine with unbalanced connections. This was fine and reasonable, especially given that discrete line-level circuitry was the norm.
At some point we started the same unbalanced devices but with earthed cabinets. I do not really see any benefit in this turn, aside from making the overall construction quite cheaper. I notice that this is much more common with "audiophile" brands (Roksan anyone?) and less common with big manufacturers even on their top end products (Yamaha comes to mind).
Surely it must be possible to do earthed plus unbalanced properly (Naim has ground lift switches on their devices and proper instructions), but most of the time this is a recipe for problems. Or at least I have witnessed enough audiophiles complaining about "hum" in such situations that makes me want to avoid any earthed device that does not have balanced connections.
Considering that most DAC chips have differential outputs and line stages are mostly opamp-based I see no reason not to go for balanced whenever possible in today's world.
Back in the days the standard in hi-fi was having class II (dual insulation) devices that were fine with unbalanced connections. This was fine and reasonable, especially given that discrete line-level circuitry was the norm.
At some point we started the same unbalanced devices but with earthed cabinets. I do not really see any benefit in this turn, aside from making the overall construction quite cheaper. I notice that this is much more common with "audiophile" brands (Roksan anyone?) and less common with big manufacturers even on their top end products (Yamaha comes to mind).
Surely it must be possible to do earthed plus unbalanced properly (Naim has ground lift switches on their devices and proper instructions), but most of the time this is a recipe for problems. Or at least I have witnessed enough audiophiles complaining about "hum" in such situations that makes me want to avoid any earthed device that does not have balanced connections.
Considering that most DAC chips have differential outputs and line stages are mostly opamp-based I see no reason not to go for balanced whenever possible in today's world.
The first 3 pin plug British Standard was 1928. I'm not that old, 49, but I'm not aware of 2 pin ever being 'the' standard, it was a choice. There's always been hifi stuff with three pins., at least in the UK.
Some brands have a preference.
Some brands have a preference.
What people are missing is that balanced (dual ended) amplifiers, all other factors excluded, have more noise and distortion than unbalanced (single ended). Where balanced wins is in common mode noise rejection.
Soooo...under what conditions is it better to go balanced? When the noise induced on a cable outweighs the added noise and distortion of a balanced amplifier. That is long lines, but in particular long low-level lines, such as mic cables. With mics it's a no-brainer. Cables are almost always at least 20 foot, often much longer (especially in the of days, you wanted to be away from R-R tape machines, tube gear with fans, and the guys running them).
For instance, the popular SM7B microphone needs a preamp with about 70 dB of gain. That means you're giving any AC hum and hash induced on the cable about 70 dB of gain before recording it. Yikes! Better cancel out as much as you can, that means balanced—no brainer.
For most home listening situations, balanced is a potential (very slight) degradation, with a modest boost to the price tag and possible problem with panel space. You can put RCA stereo ins and outs in less space than two mono XLRs, and your cables won't extend out the back as far, and the connectors won't take as much space internally either. I have a PS Audio IVH preamp here, 20 RCA jacks take up half the back panel—try that with XLR. TRS phone jacks need less space than XLR, but more depth. (BTW, I kind of hate RCAs for other reasons, just talking about the practicality of consumer electronics, which is typically connected and disconnected often.)
Last edited:
I keep reading that balanced has more noise and distortion than single-ended/unbalanced. That does not match my experience as a designer or user.
Similar threads
