Single-ended vs. Balanced interconnect question

[Boomzilla]

Even if the driving and/or receiving circuitry is not balanced, it's my understanding that use of balanced interconnect cables (+ / - / Ground) WILL provide noise reduction benefits if induced noise is present.

That being the case, I have a component whose ONLY analog audio output is unbalanced-RCA. I do, however, have a RCA to XLR converter (NOT a Balun transformer). If I immediately convert the source's unbalanced RCA output to a balanced XLR cable, and use the XLR input on the destination component, will I still get the noise reduction benefit?

Thanks - Boom

[gus4emo]

Jun 17, 2020 13:30:05 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Even if the driving and/or receiving circuitry is not balanced, it's my understanding that use of balanced interconnect cables (+ / - / Ground) WILL provide noise reduction benefits if induced noise is present.

That being the case, I have a component whose ONLY analog audio output is unbalanced-RCA. I do, however, have a RCA to XLR converter (NOT a Balun transformer). If I immediately convert the source's unbalanced RCA output to a balanced XLR cable, and use the XLR input on the destination component, will I still get the noise reduction benefit?

Thanks - Boom

I had a similar question, if rca to xlr would reduce hum....

[ttocs]

Being that balanced operation combines an inverted copy of an audio signal to the non-inverted version to be able to cancel noise, I don't see how noise could be rejected. You need both phases summed together in order to cancel out noise.

While a shielded cable can increase noise immunity, once noise is present it cannot be summed out without the balanced circuitry being at both ends.

edit: (Below) 405x5 brings up a point needing clarification on my part. I am speaking to any noise which could be injected into the cable between the two components. It doesn't take into account any noise created within each component.

[405x5]

Jun 17, 2020 13:30:05 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Even if the driving and/or receiving circuitry is not balanced, it's my understanding that use of balanced interconnect cables (+ / - / Ground) WILL provide noise reduction benefits if induced noise is present.

That being the case, I have a component whose ONLY analog audio output is unbalanced-RCA. I do, however, have a RCA to XLR converter (NOT a Balun transformer). If I immediately convert the source's unbalanced RCA output to a balanced XLR cable, and use the XLR input on the destination component, will I still get the noise reduction benefit?

Thanks - Boom

Please define “induced noise”

[garbulky]

I think like in the case of your Ashly where only the input stages are balanced, the noise picked up in the cables can be cancelled out. However the noise picked up in the amp itself does not get cancelled out as the gain stage ( power amp section) is not balanced. This would be the case for most amps that have XLR connections but aren't fully balanced.
Maybe I'm wrong.

[ttocs]

^^^^^^
Balanced output and balanced input can be exclusive from whether one or both of the components have otherwise fully balanced audio paths.

[Boomzilla]

I believe I recall KeithL saying that if either end of the cable used an XLR connection, the noise would be cancelled (but I may not remember correctly)... And when I say "induced noise," I'm specifically speaking of noise that is picked up by the interconnect itself - as opposed to anything that is present in the circuitry of the source or destination components.

[amped]

Jun 17, 2020 13:30:05 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Even if the driving and/or receiving circuitry is not balanced, it's my understanding that use of balanced interconnect cables (+ / - / Ground) WILL provide noise reduction benefits if induced noise is present.

That being the case, I have a component whose ONLY analog audio output is unbalanced-RCA. I do, however, have a RCA to XLR converter (NOT a Balun transformer). If I immediately convert the source's unbalanced RCA output to a balanced XLR cable, and use the XLR input on the destination component, will I still get the noise reduction benefit?

Thanks - Boom

Balanced is better nearly 100% of the time.  That is why they use it in professional applications....Yes RF noise rejection is nearly ALWAYS better using Balanced/XLR EVEN if you are not using a fully balanced system i.e. adapters but keep in mind in your scenario it is still an unbalanced signal.  Not to mention the fact that just because a component may have XLR in/outs it does not mean it's necessarily balanced.

[AudioHTIT]

I can’t imagine how it’s going to help with induced noise, but it might have better shielding than some random RCA cable. I’ve even heard some say that RCA / XLR cable could be noisier than a standard RCA. 🤷‍♂️

[rbk123]

Jun 17, 2020 14:40:57 GMT -5 amped said:

Balanced is better nearly 100% of the time.  That is why they use it in professional applications....

Balanced is nearly always better when it comes to noise rejection, which is why they use it in professional applications. That and the connectors are far more sturdy/reliable to sustain pro equipment abuse/use.

Balanced frequently does not sound better due to not only the additional circuitry the signal has to go through (kicking the minimalists' "simpler is better" theory out the window), but the misalignment of the duplicate circuitry.

[vcautokid]

Balanced and Differential is explained from Lonnie Vaughn. You get the benefit of knowing more about the XSP-1 Gen 2.

[ttocs]

^^^^^^
A rerun. (at least for me)

[Gary Cook]

If its got an RCA connector at one end then it's an unbalanced (hot + shield) connection. As such it won't have the induced noise rejection that a balanced (+ & - + shield) connection.

FWIW my "induced noise", prior to going fully (all the way) balanced, was from the ice maker in the fridge, barely audible and obviously infrequent.

Cheers
Gary

[donh50]

Jun 17, 2020 13:30:05 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Even if the driving and/or receiving circuitry is not balanced, it's my understanding that use of balanced interconnect cables (+ / - / Ground) WILL provide noise reduction benefits if induced noise is present.

That being the case, I have a component whose ONLY analog audio output is unbalanced-RCA. I do, however, have a RCA to XLR converter (NOT a Balun transformer). If I immediately convert the source's unbalanced RCA output to a balanced XLR cable, and use the XLR input on the destination component, will I still get the noise reduction benefit?

Thanks - Boom

I am not sure exactly what you mean by "induced noise". Common-mode noise rejection depends upon a differential ("balanced") signal path. There are various ways to make balanced receivers and transmitters and not all are truly differential. With a single-ended input, some stages do provide some additional noise immunity if the cable is wired properly. The usual way (without a differential converter, transformer or active) is to use an XLR cable with the RCA end connected to the +/- inner pair and with the shield connected at one end (often the end with the balanced stage). That way the outer shield provides a path to ground for noise somewhat independent of the signal path.

Again depending upon the circuit configuration of the balanced device, that may also break a ground loop.

HTH - Don

[trevordj]

Jun 17, 2020 13:30:05 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Even if the driving and/or receiving circuitry is not balanced, it's my understanding that use of balanced interconnect cables (+ / - / Ground) WILL provide noise reduction benefits if induced noise is present.

That being the case, I have a component whose ONLY analog audio output is unbalanced-RCA. I do, however, have a RCA to XLR converter (NOT a Balun transformer). If I immediately convert the source's unbalanced RCA output to a balanced XLR cable, and use the XLR input on the destination component, will I still get the noise reduction benefit?

Thanks - Boom

Yes, you still get some benefit. A good read on the topic: www.jhbrandt.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Interconnection_of_Balanced_and-Unbalanced-Equipment.pdf

[lokyc]

IIRC, there is benefit but not as much as a fully balanced pathway. It has something to do with how the cables are constructed which provides an additional shielding function. But the benefits are not as dramatic as a fully balanced path.

My experience with different rigs previously is the biggest difference is between preamp and power amp. Source to preamp matters less. The ideal scenario would be like the RMC1/XMC2, where the source are stereo DACs running in mono channel.

[Boomzilla]

Boy did THIS thread run amok!

First - As I've explained, "induced noise" is something that is not being generated by either the source or the destination components, but rather hiss, hum, or noise that is picked up by the interconnect itself.

Second - Yes, we all understand that a balanced-circuitry source and destination component combination are more effective in noise cancelling when using XLR interconnects than when used with any other type of interconnects.

Finally - Having an XLR connector at EITHER end of an interconnect provides at least SOME of the noise-cancelling benefits that would exist if both source and destination components used XLR connectors (REGARDLESS of whether their internal circuitry is balanced or not).

My question, specifically, and obviously not well-stated originally, is:

"What percentage of induced noise cancellation will occur if one and only one end of the interconnect uses an XLR connector?" 50%? 90% and WHY?

And not to be rude about it, but this is not an "opinion" question - there IS an objective and factual answer here, and that's the answer that I'm seeking.

Thanks - Boom

[405x5]

The answer to this question was first published in 1623 in William Shakespeare’s “Much ado About Nothing” God Bless Him!

[rbk123]

Jun 18, 2020 6:58:31 GMT -5 405x5 said:

The answer to this question was first published in 1623 in William Shakespeare’s “Much ado About Nothing”

It's the Boom way.

[405x5]

Jun 18, 2020 7:24:02 GMT -5 rbk123 said:

Jun 18, 2020 6:58:31 GMT -5 405x5 said:

The answer to this question was first published in 1623 in William Shakespeare’s “Much ado About Nothing”

It's the Boom way.

Yes I know.
Just something to go along with the morning Java!