|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 5, 2010 21:49:11 GMT -5
I figured I'd break this out so we don't clutter up the XMC-1 thread any more than it already is.
I was asked if I knew of any fully balanced Pre/Pros, and I could only come up with two. My assumption is that HDMI 1.3+ and 1080p upscaling were requirements. Maybe some of you know of some others?
Denon AVP-A1HDCI MSRP: $7500
B&K Reference 70 MSRP: $3798
Krell Evolution 707 (thanks, bootman) MSRP: $30,000
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 5, 2010 22:01:38 GMT -5
I was under the impression that the Krell Evolution 707 was also.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 5, 2010 22:06:10 GMT -5
I was under the impression that the Krell Evolution 707 was also. I'm under the impression you are correct: |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 5, 2010 22:17:22 GMT -5
I also think the Anthem DV2 has an available direct balanced analog path available.
(may not qualify as 100% fully balanced. I would have to look at the circuit diagrams.)
|
|
|
|
Post by MukAudio on Apr 5, 2010 22:51:01 GMT -5
So has it been confirmed that the XMC-1 would be fully balanced or just have balanced outs?
Mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 5, 2010 23:22:15 GMT -5
So has it been confirmed that the XMC-1 would be fully balanced or just have balanced outs? Mark. Mark, it has not been confirmed either way. |
|
|
|
Post by junchoon on Apr 6, 2010 1:11:03 GMT -5
what about Onkyo PR-SC886 and PR-SC5507? or Marantz AV8003?
thanks.
wps
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 6, 2010 2:13:01 GMT -5
what about Onkyo PR-SC886 and PR-SC5507? or Marantz AV8003? thanks. wps Nope, nope, and don't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by junchoon on Apr 6, 2010 2:56:33 GMT -5
what about Onkyo PR-SC886 and PR-SC5507? or Marantz AV8003? thanks. wps Nope, nope, and don't think so. thanks. wps |
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Apr 6, 2010 9:32:19 GMT -5
Your going to pay SERIOUS bucks for a HT processor that has true balanced outputs..................
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 6, 2010 9:51:20 GMT -5
Your going to pay SERIOUS bucks for a HT processor that has true balanced outputs.................. Apparently! (see above) Assuming the B&K even is... I could only confirm that one via anecdotal conversation, not any official word I could find from B&K. Of course, I owned the Ref 50 back in the day, and it was a fantastic piece. |
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Apr 6, 2010 10:01:02 GMT -5
Your going to pay SERIOUS bucks for a HT processor that has true balanced outputs.................. Apparently! (see above) Assuming the B&K even is... I could only confirm that one via anecdotal conversation, not any official word I could find from B&K. Of course, I owned the Ref 50 back in the day, and it was a fantastic piece. I do not think the B&K product is truely balanced, very few multichannel HT processors are. But you do not need balanced circuitry for HT use to get an exceptional signal and SQ either. |
|
|
|
Post by merlinwerks on Apr 6, 2010 10:19:05 GMT -5
...But you do not need balanced circuitry for HT use to get an exceptional signal and SQ either. +1 I never really understood the fascination with balanced connections in a home application  Do people perceive that there is an audible difference in sound quality? Do many people really have such long cable runs or seriously noisy environments/ground loops to justify the added expense? Or has it been just good marketing by the consumer audio industry? |
|
|
|
Post by junchoon on Apr 6, 2010 10:29:50 GMT -5
But you do not need balanced circuitry for HT use to get an exceptional signal and SQ either. what about 5.1 SACD??? using xa5400es as source, just want to make sure i can squeeze the best sound from it. wps |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 6, 2010 10:30:16 GMT -5
...But you do not need balanced circuitry for HT use to get an exceptional signal and SQ either. +1 I never really understood the fascination with balanced connections in a home application Do people perceive that there is an audible difference in sound quality? Do many people really have such long cable runs or seriously noisy environments/ground loops to justify the added expense? Or has it been just good marketing by the consumer audio industry? If you go read my comments in the XMC-1 Redux thread, you'll see my overall thoughts on fully balanced. But, to play a bit of the advocate here, in a fully balanced design, you theoretically would avoid any amount of signal intrusion to/from any other channel in the system. If anything, in an HT system, where you have a whole bunch of channels all crammed into one place, this could be more important than in 2 channel, not less. Of course for HT you probably can't hear it, but we're not all using these for HT. Many people are listening to uncompressed, 96KHz multi-channel music now. As well, there are many that double their Pre/Pro as their 2-channel device, for better or worse. All of these reasons would make someone want the highest quality sound from their Pre/Pro a person could get. Is being fully balanced the answer? I don't know, the choice is up to every particular person, just like everything else. I, personally, never really understood the fascination with $100k speakers, or amplifiers, or anything else, but for someone, that's a cup of tea they just can't eat their biscuits without. |
|
|
|
Post by jasonf on Apr 6, 2010 12:29:17 GMT -5
They aren't just talking about balanced connections. They are talking about a HT that's balanced top to bottom. ...But you do not need balanced circuitry for HT use to get an exceptional signal and SQ either. +1 I never really understood the fascination with balanced connections in a home application Do people perceive that there is an audible difference in sound quality? Do many people really have such long cable runs or seriously noisy environments/ground loops to justify the added expense? Or has it been just good marketing by the consumer audio industry? |
|
|
|
Post by jasonf on Apr 6, 2010 12:41:26 GMT -5
I had a B&K Ref. 70 for a while. It was not balanced top-to-bottom electrically, but it did have 1 stereo DAC for each output, which means it must have been running DACs in balanced mode.
I do have to say though the B&K Ref. 70 was a huge disappointment to me. Sound wise it was missing something, at least paired with my Paradigm speakers (IMO I think the Ref. 70 needed to be paired with electrostats or similar.) The quality of the unit was absolutely HORRIBLE, nonstop problems. I can't recommend the Ref. 70 to anyone unfortunately.
The B&K Ref. 200.5 amp I had it paired with, however, was exceptional (and not balanced.)
For those doubting the benefit of balanced, on every balanced setup I've had the noise floor has been inperceptible. That has not been the case with the unbalanced setups that I've used. Personally, it's doubtful that I'll ever return to an un-balanced setup.
|
|
|
|
Post by merlinwerks on Apr 6, 2010 12:46:21 GMT -5
But, to play a bit of the advocate here, in a fully balanced design, you theoretically would avoid any amount of signal intrusion to/from any other channel in the system. Out of sincere curiosity, what is your definition of a fully balanced design? |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 6, 2010 16:28:01 GMT -5
But, to play a bit of the advocate here, in a fully balanced design, you theoretically would avoid any amount of signal intrusion to/from any other channel in the system. Out of sincere curiosity, what is your definition of a fully balanced design? Nowhere in the signal path is the signal ever converted to a single-ended signal. In the case of a 2-channel preamp, that would mean nowhere from the balanced inputs to the balanced outputs is the signal ever left single-ended. In the case of a fully balanced HT processor, same thing, but more channels. |
|
|
|
Post by merlinwerks on Apr 6, 2010 16:55:41 GMT -5
Out of sincere curiosity, what is your definition of a fully balanced design? Nowhere in the signal path is the signal ever converted to a single-ended signal. In the case of a 2-channel preamp, that would mean nowhere from the balanced inputs to the balanced outputs is the signal ever left single-ended. In the case of a fully balanced HT processor, same thing, but more channels. Thanks, as jasonf surmised I was focused on balanced interconnections between gear. Even so, I can still only agree with your previous example (Reply #14) in theory ;D To each his own  |
|
Do people perceive that there is an audible difference in sound quality? Do many people really have such long cable runs or seriously noisy environments/ground loops to justify the added expense? Or has it been just good marketing by the consumer audio industry?
