Balanced Interconnects

[isotopesope]

On 12/14/2017 at 5:54 AM, Searing75 said:

 Belden is the only cable I use in all audio gear.  I highly recommend it!

i'm using Blue Jeans XLR's between my Marantz AV7702mkII/MM7705 setup, with Neutrik NC3B connectors and Beldon 1800F cable.  really happy with them, especially for the price.

 

https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/balancedaudio/index.htm

[Travis In Austin]

i'm using Blue Jeans XLR's between my Marantz AV7702mkII/MM7705 setup, with Neutrik NC3B connectors and Beldon 1800F cable.  really happy with them, especially for the price.
 
https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/balancedaudio/index.htm

I have always liked Blue Jeans Cables. @nosvalves turned me on to them 15 years ago

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[EMRR]

On 12/13/2017 at 7:22 PM, Coytee said:

My opinion again...  I'd avoid the Canare wire.  I bought it once and discovered the sheath is woven (verses 'wrapped' on the Mogami)

 

Evidently, there is a trick to pull the wires out of the woven sheath but I could never master it.  MUCH easier with the Mogami to simply unwrap what you need and go from there.

 

 

Depends on what you need.  Canare is the best I've encountered for live events, and I have a lot of it I've been using for 20+ years, all of it still coils and uncoils perfectly, in fact handling is so much better than any other portable cable I'd put money on it cutting labor costs over time.  The woven shield has rejection advantages too.  I've run 600-1000 feet of it through basketball arenas during broadcast events, under bleachers and down the side of the floor, through 100's of electrical connections and tons of RF.  It's never failed to deliver in that hostile environment.  Home use; easily no benefit from those aspects.  

 

Grimm balanced wire gets some great reviews, and I can see where it would have benefits with low level microphone signals, especially passives such as ribbon microphones with very weak signals and huge sensitivity to cable and amplifier loads.  It has an additional encasing like a coax cable, which is there to lower microphonics (don't laugh, envision the wire in a remote recording that's run next to a subwoofer or walked on constantly, under gaffe tape).  It's lower capacitance than most too.   I think it may be braid shield too, not the easiest stuff to work overall.    

 

The other wire in favor many places for balanced analog audio is to instead use 110Ω digital wire, which has greater bandwidth due to lower capacitance.  Not really any more expensive.  There are testimonials about Hollywood film production places with many miles of wire finding clear benefit from this type of wire in those situations.  

 

Me; I got some Grimm for select ribbon microphone paths in recording, and the wire from wall panel to patchbay is 110Ω digital stuff.   That covers the part with very low signal levels that could be most impacted be environmental aspects and wire length.  

 

Whether a balanced interconnect has advantages is going to depend on the send/receive circuitry along with the hostility of the environment in terms of induced noise.  

 

The flip side of this, I believe it's Bernie Grundman Mastering which at one point had removed the additional balancing circuitry (audio transformers) from a bunch of equipment, and ran all connections unbalanced for better sound, with less stuff in the way.  In that case we have a facility with very careful electrical planning and appropriate shielding, doubtless a lot of Audio Precision test set analysis of paths aiding decisions outside of what the ears say.  I have plenty of paths in my studio control room that are 20-30 feet unbalanced, with no problems.  In those cases, it'd take additional stand alone balancing amplifiers to change the situation, which would be more circuitry in the paths.  

 

YMMV....

 

[Khornukopia]

3 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

Did y'all just wake up or something?

Yes I did. Good afternoon.

[John Chi-town]

10 hours ago, -js- said:

so, in my case, I feel like there is MUCH to learn in so many topics, with this being one of them.  I gather from this post

 

 

 

1) - that the design is the REAL basis from which improvements can be realized.  correct?

2) - also - just because a component has balanced input/output, that alone does not necessarily mean that component is automatically better than similar, or even identical, one that has only unbalanced.  is that a correct statement/understanding?

 

if #2 is correct, what parts of the design or tech used lend to lower distortion circuits?

 

thanks for humoring me & lending me your experience

 

-John

JS

 

I am not here to humor you.  Go troll somewhere else.

 

Best regards,

John

[CECAA850]

On ‎12‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 7:52 PM, John Chi-town said:

I am not here to humor you.  Go troll somewhere else.

 

What am I missing here?  Is there some back story or history here that I'm not aware of?  Looked like a legitimate question to me.

[Khornukopia]

On ‎12‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 12:08 PM, EMRR said:

The other wire in favor many places for balanced analog audio is to instead use 110Ω digital wire, which has greater bandwidth due to lower capacitance.

I use a 3 pin 50' long DMX cable for my room response measurement microphone. Would work for interconnecting amps also, but XLR cables can not be used for DMX (stage lighting control) applications.

 

 

[-js-]

On 12/19/2017 at 10:49 AM, CECAA850 said:

What am I missing here?  Is there some back story or history here that I'm not aware of?  Looked like a legitimate question to me.

 

thanks.  no other story that I'm aware of.  as I said - just asking a question trying to learn a little (or big) something new.

[CECAA850]

17 minutes ago, -js- said:

 

thanks.  no other story that I'm aware of.  as I said - just asking a question trying to learn a little (or big) something new.

I was under the same impression as you.  I always thought that they were the same and the only reason NOT to use RCA's was for long runs where you might pick up interference.

[babadono]

Balanced and UnBalanced are the same. Except for the Un

[-js-]

[EMRR]

On 12/20/2017 at 1:51 PM, Khornukopia said:

I use a 3 pin 50' long DMX cable for my room response measurement microphone. Would work for interconnecting amps also, but XLR cables can not be used for DMX (stage lighting control) applications.

 

 

 

Now that's a strange one, those as a combo.  All the DMX wire I've used can't be used for audio.  

[Travis In Austin]

1 hour ago, EMRR said:

 

Now that's a strange one, those as a combo.  All the DMX wire I've used can't be used for audio.  

AES/EBU is for digital audio only, that standard allows for a broad range of impedance between about 85 and 130 ohms.  DMX I believe is 120 ohm.  So a manufacturer can make cable that has an impedance of about 120 ohms that will fit into both the DMX and AES/EBU standard.

 

Standard analog cable is from 45 to 70 ohm.

[Travis In Austin]

On 12/20/2017 at 12:51 PM, Khornukopia said:

I use a 3 pin 50' long DMX cable for my room response measurement microphone. Would work for interconnecting amps also, but XLR cables can not be used for DMX (stage lighting control) applications.

 

 

That particular brand specifies that it has a nominal impedience of between 110 and 120 ohms.  So it fits in the AES/EBU standard for digital audio cable and the DMX standard.

[Marvel]

I've still got some cables I made in the early '70s, heavy Belden with a braid. They still coil perfectly, but I never let idiots wind up my cables.

 

Bruce

[John Chi-town]

On 12/19/2017 at 10:49 AM, CECAA850 said:

What am I missing here?  Is there some back story or history here that I'm not aware of?  Looked like a legitimate question to me.

 

I read the last sentence of his post as a little smug.  "Thanks for humoring me"?  My apologies if I misunderstood.

 

Best regards,

John

[John Chi-town]

 

A direct quote from Nelson Pass himself regarding his design on the Adcom GFP-750.  

 

The circuit couldn't be simpler. Says Pass, "It's a differential pair—the end. A single gain stage, balanced input, balanced output, no feedback....We took a pair of MOSFETs, and the inputs go to the gates of the MOSFETs. The MOSFET sources are tied together and biased with a current source, with the signal taken off the drains. [The circuit] can run unbalanced on either side, although the performance is best when it's run balanced.

 

So, that being said I tend to believe the man who can make a toaster sound great.

 

Best regards,

John

[djk]

" heavy Belden with a braid "

Fine cable, but not for musical instruments (spiral-wrap shield is better for cables that move).

[Marvel]

25 minutes ago, djk said:

" heavy Belden with a braid "

Fine cable, but not for musical instruments (spiral-wrap shield is better for cables that move).

 

Microphone cables, always on stands...

 

Your brother liked them, too. He was the only other person I trusted to mess with them.

[EMRR]

11 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

AES/EBU is for digital audio only, that standard allows for a broad range of impedance between about 85 and 130 ohms.  DMX I believe is 120 ohm.  So a manufacturer can make cable that has an impedance of about 120 ohms that will fit into both the DMX and AES/EBU standard.

 

Standard analog cable is from 45 to 70 ohm.

 

 

Well, AES/EBU can be used for analog audio, as I said, it's superior with very long runs because of the lower capacitance.

 

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess from what I read that all the DMX I encounter in the field can't be used for audio because of shield wiring differences.  It appears common for DMX to connect shield at one end only, which is good practice in many cases, though definitely not for microphone runs.  But I'm the audio guy, not the lighting guy.   Anyway, I've never seen that combo version cable before now.   Thanks for the explanation.