Anyone running a "balanced" setup? I don't understand the advantage

[alfa147x]

ouch :~

edit: hm, though you could make/get a balanced to single end adapter.

Yeah. That doesn't seem like an issue. I have all my stuff from when I was into the whole DIY cable thing (Love exact lengths).

 

[Howard]

nm

 

[alfa147x]

nm

Damn it! I keep on clicking this link in the "User CP"

expecting to read another well made post by you. Only to be greeted with a stern "nm".

 

[Howard]

http://nwavguy.blogspot.ca/

 

[slashbinslashbash]

http://nwavguy.blogspot.ca/

This pretty much says it all:

Try to wrongly claim all transparent gear sounds different than other transparent gear and make up weak excuses to avoid blind testing demonstrating what differences they can really hear.

Anyone who hasn't done a truly blind listening test is kidding themselves if they claim they can hear differences in things like DACs and most amplifiers. You owe it to yourself to find a similarly-minded friend, set up a test and spend a couple of hours testing each other before going out and spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on audio equipment that you think sounds better.

 

[Fallen Kell]

less noise (maybe)
moar power

It is less noise, not more power. The balanced design (for systems that actually use the balanced design, not simply use XLR connectors) sends the signal down two different wires out of phase with each other. This way when an external noise source affects the wire (say a magnetic field), it is assumed that the noise will affect both of the wires is approximately the same manner. And since the signal set between the two wires are out of phase, the errors introduced on the two wires correct itself when the signals are put back into phase and merged together.

I am going to date myself, but if you have a transparency (i.e. a clear plastic sheet that you can draw on and used for overhead projectors before PowerPoint), draw two horizontal lines with an inch or two gap between them with a small hump in the line at the same spot with the same height on each line. That hump is the external "noise" affecting your signal. Now fold the transparency in on itself so that the two lines are aligned with each other and it now looks like one line with a bubble in it. Now if you merged the lines together subtracting the height of the one with the height of the other, you will now have a straight line again, which is your pure signal.

That is what a balanced design does. But as I said, not all things with XLR connectors actually are balanced, because balanced designs were seen as a high-end feature (and they are because it requires some additional electronics to make the signal out of phase and put it back in-phase and merge the two waveform/signals), but it doesn't really cost anything extra to simply put a XLR socket in place, and the cheaper brands/lines saw and knew that, and some of them decided to put XLR connectors on their amp and pre-processors and thus tried to dupe customers into purchasing their product because balanced was a high-end feature, and it looks like they had same connectors on their product which costs half as much as the other competitors which had a true balanced design.

 

[Howard]

It is less noise, not more power. The balanced design (for systems that actually use the balanced design, not simply use XLR connectors) sends the signal down two different wires out of phase with each other. This way when an external noise source affects the wire (say a magnetic field), it is assumed that the noise will affect both of the wires is approximately the same manner. And since the signal set between the two wires are out of phase, the errors introduced on the two wires correct itself when the signals are put back into phase and merged together.

I am going to date myself, but if you have a transparency (i.e. a clear plastic sheet that you can draw on and used for overhead projectors before PowerPoint), draw two horizontal lines with an inch or two gap between them with a small hump in the line at the same spot with the same height on each line. That hump is the external "noise" affecting your signal. Now fold the transparency in on itself so that the two lines are aligned with each other and it now looks like one line with a bubble in it. Now if you merged the lines together subtracting the height of the one with the height of the other, you will now have a straight line again, which is your pure signal.

That is what a balanced design does. But as I said, not all things with XLR connectors actually are balanced, because balanced designs were seen as a high-end feature (and they are because it requires some additional electronics to make the signal out of phase and put it back in-phase and merge the two waveform/signals), but it doesn't really cost anything extra to simply put a XLR socket in place, and the cheaper brands/lines saw and knew that, and some of them decided to put XLR connectors on their amp and pre-processors and thus tried to dupe customers into purchasing their product because balanced was a high-end feature, and it looks like they had same connectors on their product which costs half as much as the other competitors which had a true balanced design.

A little known fact is that the signals need not be out-of-phase for common-mode noise cancellation to occur.

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/balanced-2.htm#s1

 

[vbuggy]

This pretty much says it all:



Anyone who hasn't done a truly blind listening test is kidding themselves if they claim they can hear differences in things like DACs and most amplifiers. You owe it to yourself to find a similarly-minded friend, set up a test and spend a couple of hours testing each other before going out and spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on audio equipment that you think sounds better.

How you test is also just as important.

The problem with audiophiles in general is that few *want* to know the facts. Even if comparative testing, it's usually done in such an uncontrolled a manner as to render it worthless. If you try and argue it out, it will always, but always, end with "Well it's what I hear that's important".

I do like that Tyll Hertsens has tried to quantify what makes something better than others better, but he chooses his battles very carefully to be friends with everyone, unlike nwavguy who clearly doesn't give a shit. I don't think he's tested a single Grado beyond the lowest-end for example.

BTW the advantages of - and why it's used on pro audio situations - of balanced setups only comes with ginormous cable lengths, which are e.g. common in studio setups. With your 6 feet of headphone cable - eff all difference.

 

[gevorg]

NwAvGuy released his ODAC today (open source, free to DIY) with "Balanced Outputs" listed as "no snakeoil required".

This DAC might give some fresh air to the audio community. Head-Fi sponsors are probably firing up their ammunition. :biggrin:

 

[vbuggy]

Interesting.

As I said above using balanced interconnects makes a difference for huge (tens, if not hundreds of metres) cable runs. Using balanced headphone cables makes no difference for your average lengths of <10ft. Hearing a difference = placebo.

 

[AD5MB]

my experience is from radio, not audio, but it's still electrons forced to move down coax.

• on an unbalanced line the ground connection is at ground potential on the back of the radio only
• by the time the RF makes it to the antenna there is a current induced on the shield by the voltage on the center conductor
• the shield is floating and ungrounded at the antenna
• creating a current on the shield

now connect the shields of two antennas at the tower... no, thank you. not on my radios

with a 3 conductor cable you are inducing two currents on the shield. if this has any effect, that would be loss of separation. two muddy audio channels where you want two clear and distinct separate channels.

balanced lines would give you left on the left and right on the right.

I sincerely doubt that a 57 year old SCUBA diving pilot with a collection of loud rowdy cars and motorsickles would hear the difference when listening to Led Zep. You would need Virgin Golden Ears, and mine have been dragged down dirt roads too often

 

[darkswordsman17]

NwAvGuy released his ODAC today (open source, free to DIY) with "Balanced Outputs" listed as "no snakeoil required".

This DAC might give some fresh air to the audio community. Head-Fi sponsors are probably firing up their ammunition. :biggrin:

It is not open source but possibly could be in the future.

NO SCHEMATIC: Because YoYoDyne is taking considerable financial risk to produce an unproven DAC in relatively high volume, it’s not reasonable to have it be open source (see the previous ODAC articles). Once he’s hopefully recovered his investment, we plan to re-visit the open source question.

 

[MagickMan]

Yeah most of it is snake oil. A whole thread devoted to different USB cables and how they change the sound from a DAC is laughable. But just like any other forum they have their high and low points. You learn to take what makes sense and leave the trash behind

I was asking about balanced setups because Schiit audio is releasing a balanced Amp and DAC soon. I have their current DAC and amp (Valhalla) and really like their products. Got me considering rewiring my headphones for a balanced set up.

There are some of us who have been working to introduce some sanity to that site for a little while now and it seems to be helping. Some things I've found from my own "unbiased" (heh) testing and buying a lot of stuff, thank god for Amazon's return policy...

1. Cables usually don't change anything on an audible level unless there's something wrong with the cable you're replacing. I use a lot of DIY and Blue Jeans cables.
2. Most cans (80%) don't need fancy amps or any amp at all. Also, I can't tell a quality difference between balanced and unbalanced, likely there isn't one.
3. In the nosebleed area of head-fi, >$2k, the levels of diminishing returns are shocking.
4. All low and mid-fi DACs are about the same, what you should mostly look for are the features you want. Upsampling is just marketing hype. It's best to get something rather inexpensive like the Musicstreamer II and be done with it. HOWEVER, some high-end DACs are worth the price if you have relatively deep pockets, they're completely silent in terms of noise floor and have very robust output stages. Don't clown around, there's really only two to consider, IMO. The ASUS Xonar Essence ONE and the Benchmark DAC1. I have the Benchmark DAC1 PRE and it is crazy nice, and it has a great amp built in.
5. Speaking of amps... all SS amps sound the same. If that's the route you're taking then buy something decent with the connections and features you want. The whole "amps increase resolution and expand soundstage" is crap. However, cheap amps are garbage, they don't last long and they're bad for introducing hum and static. Look into the Objective 2, it's inexpensive and robust.
6. OTOH, I love tubes. They do add their own pleasant distortion which does impose a certain degree of harmonic texture, and with OTL and single ended amps, a little warmth. The Bottlehead Crack is a great OTL amp, very well designed. For nice single ended amps you're going to pay some serious coin. I bit the bullet and bought a Cary SLI-80 F1, it's been perfect for my headphones and my desktop speakers. It's switchable between triode and pentode modes so it's like having two amps in one.
6a. Tube rolling is a waste of time unless you like cool looking tubes (I do), but cheap tubes can be noisy and flaky. Get a nice set and don't worry about them.
7. Headphones are like speakers, they're where you want to put most of your money. Dynamics, orthos, and electrostats, I like them all. But after hearing the best orthos and stats, I'm hooked. The former for the best soundstage and the latter for the most detail, imaging is great with either.
8. It doesn't matter what kind of setup you have, if your source material is crap the output will be too. The more detailed your cans the more important this is. Find the best mastered recordings and rip them to FLAC or 320k MP3.

Three's really no cap on what you want to spend, I see well crafted audio gear as similar to buying art. If a person doesn't see the point in spending money on a nice painting or sculpture, they likely won't see most of the allure of high end audio. For me, it's about the sound first, but I can't ignore the visual and tactile aesthetics. There's something about the glowing tubes and attention to detail.

Main rigs:

Benchmark DAC1 PRE > Cary SLI-80 Signature F1 > HiFiMan HE-6
Benchmark DAC1 PRE > STAX SRM-717 > STAX SR-007 Mk1
I also go DAC1 PRE > SLI-80 > Woo WEE > SR-007 for the times I want to overdose on tube sound.

Yeah, it's been a good chunk of money but it's a hell of a lot of fun.

 

[alfa147x]

Oh god. Tubes and their distortion. Amazing.

How do you like the HiFiMan HE-6? ever compare it to a sennheiser HD650?

 

[NutBucket]

I can assure you SS amps do not all sound the same. Its like saying all LCD TVs have the same picture quality given "comparable" specs. Ridiculous.

 

[uhohs]

all ss sounds the same? all topologies sound the same? all opamps sound the same? lol

i don't understand all the benchmark dac1 fanboying either, it's a fine unit, but there's plenty of cheaper options that sound as good. and the amp in it isn't as great as people make it out to be either.

 

[Howard]

I can assure you SS amps do not all sound the same.

You're right. I'd daresay, though, that all well-engineered amps above a certain price point do.

 

[kornphlake]

All SS amps have the potential to sound the same, but too often they're built with certain shortcuts like power supplies that are too small, lack of shielding in key areas, inadequate grounding, undersized capacitors, etc. Saying a cheap amp sounds the same as any other amp is a bit of a stretch.

I do agree that a well built solid state amp will sound just like any other well built solid state amp.

 

[MagickMan]

I can assure you SS amps do not all sound the same. Its like saying all LCD TVs have the same picture quality given "comparable" specs. Ridiculous.

You are ridiculous, as is your comparison. Try an ABX test of SS amps, and as long as they aren't defective they'll sound the same.

I do agree that a well built solid state amp will sound just like any other well built solid state amp.

Yep. Ask an electronics engineer, they'll say the same.

 

[MagickMan]

all ss sounds the same? all topologies sound the same? all opamps sound the same? lol

i don't understand all the benchmark dac1 fanboying either, it's a fine unit, but there's plenty of cheaper options that sound as good. and the amp in it isn't as great as people make it out to be either.

You own one?

 

[uhohs]

I've listened to one. Doesn't sound better or too different than my Presonus Central Station.

 

[MagickMan]

I've listened to one. Doesn't sound better or too different than my Presonus Central Station.

No, don't think I'd want that sitting with my Cary amp.

Sound the same? Probably would, since DACs beyond a certain point sound the same. I needed the amount of digital inputs the PRE has, as well as the dual headphone jacks. It also doesn't hurt that it's built like a Sherman tank on steroids. Got it for a big discount because it was a demo unit.

 

[Born2bwire]

You're right. I'd daresay, though, that all well-engineered amps above a certain price point do.

Yeah, I would generally agree. I would point out the moniker well-engineered though. This isn't really the case so much these days I'm sure but 10 years ago when headphone systems were taking off you did see some rather sketchy stuff. I had one amp where the designer ran the AC from the recepticle in back to the power switch in front, right by the right channel power tube (hummmmmm). I had that wire hookup replaced by a coax. But there are some really good open-source projects out there like the Meta42, M^3, Beta-22, etc. I know I'm really dating myself because the Beta22 is the most recent one I know about. Actually, the Beta is a surprisingly expensive one. I think if you price out an all out balanced version, the parts alone come to around $500.

 

[MagickMan]

Oh god. Tubes and their distortion. Amazing.

How do you like the HiFiMan HE-6? ever compare it to a sennheiser HD650?

The HD650 has a greater quantity of bass, but that's about it. Where the HD650 has big roll off above 5kHz, the HE-6s would sound quite a bit brighter but have sub-bass that's unreal. The HE-6s are my neutral reference phones, their FR is flat, flat, all the way down to 10Hz.

Personally, I like neutral>bright cans but most people find them to be too harsh.

 

[Born2bwire]

The HD650 has a greater quantity of bass, but that's about it. Where the HD650 has big roll off above 5kHz, the HE-6s would sound quite a bit brighter but have sub-bass that's unreal. The HE-6s are my neutral reference phones, their FR is flat, flat, all the way down to 10Hz.

Personally, I like neutral>bright cans but most people find them to be too harsh.

Mmmm... Been a long time since I listened to the Stax Omega II. Bah, reminds me I should give my system a spin tonight.