XLR vs RCA

Hello all,

I have just got myself into trying out XLR connection as opposed to RCA. I am currently testing out 2 models of XLR ICs from VDH. I am using it between MF M1 DAC and MF M6i integrated amp. Besides relying on my ears to compare the sound, what would be the technical explanation of XLR being superior than RCA?

My connection is as follows:

MF Xray V3 to M1 DAC via coaxial digital connection and from M1 DAC to M6i amp using XLR. Is this considered a fully balanced?

After listening to the set up for a few days, I noticed that the sound level from XLR is somehow amplified. I just need to put the volume knob at 8 o'clock and it is as loud as when I use RCA connection at 9 o'clock on the volume knob.
Is this normal?

XLR however does give more detail in low and high ends. The tone is definitely balanced with minimal sign of bloatness. Vocal transparency is evident.

However, on certain type of music, I still prefer the RCA connection via the X10v3 tube buffer.

Hi elhefe,
Although I never have chance to try out XLR before. But in the correct technical term, XLR is for professional use and RCA is for domestic market.

It is the madness of Audiophile and the audiophile brands that take the RCA science to infinity and beyond. If both types are given the same treatment, the XLR will always be superior format.

Reason is: XLR has it positive and feedback signal being shielded by a ground, while RCA use the feedback wire as a shield as well.

Hope this help~

XLR will retain the signal better over long runs. Also whether XLR or RCA sounds better depends on the equipment. On higher end equipments which are dual mono or balanced in design internally, then XLR will potentially sound better. This is reversed if the equipment is not, in which case RCA will potentially sound better (please note the word 'potentially', things don't always work out like theory says it would in real life). This is due to the need to convert from one type to the other, i.e. balanced to singled ended or vice versa.

This term 'balanced', what exactly is it referring to? Circuitry alone? Hardware? Signal emission?

So far my set up connection above, is it balanced? I am reading through the manuals for the items, cant seem to find good info.

SQ wise as mentioned, its not all the time better than RCA. But maybe also for RCA I am using via the 10V3 which provides a warm touch to the sound.

The XLR can sometimes sound a bit harsh especially for heavy metal.

eh what happened to mugenfoo's posting?

I was wondering the same thing. He got some useful information inside there. I am sure none of us (admin, moderators) removed it. Maybe he removed it and is doing some research in order to repost a more detailed explanation ?

aaaahhh maybe. I did manage to save the content though

Waaahhh thse XLRs are not cheap. RM thousands maaaarrr... maybe stick to RCA. Cheap cheap.

the output level and output impedance of the xlr connection are not the same as that of the single-ended outputs. that's why the xlr sounds louder.

lower-priced components and even those costing up to RM15k-RM20k will not have xlr connections that are true balanced. due to the extra cost of implementing a true balanced xlr connection, you will find them only in high-end components.

i use xlr from my benchmark dac1 pre to the bryston 4b sst. i don't think these have true balanced connections and their brochures do not confirm or deny it. xlr sounds more dynamic and exciting compared with rca on this combo.

however when i used the benchmark with a Mark Levinson No 532 Dual Monaural Power Amplifier, there was a massive difference between xlr and rca, even more so than with the Bryston. the Mark Levinson uses true balanced circuitry, but it comes at a high price - more than RM90k.

sflam,

The different in sound between XLR and RCA is very evident eventhough my set up is in the range of RM14K to RM20K. I say different because not all songs XLR sounds better. Heavy metal can sound a bit shrill. So I am sure there is some sort 'balanced' element in the circuitry but maybe as u suggest, is not full blown balanced as very high end kit. BUt I am keen to know what exactly defines a balanced equipment?

Both my M6i amp and M1 DAC states: One pair line level XLR (balanced) connectors. So how do we go about to know whether this statement is true?

Is there a good reading reference somewhere regarding this?

from wikipedia:

"Most professional audio products (recording, public address, etc.) provide differential balanced inputs and outputs, typically via XLR or TRS connectors. However, in most cases, a differential balanced input signal is internally converted to a single-ended signal via transformer or electronic amplifier. After internal processing, the single-ended signal is converted back to a differential balanced signal and fed to an output. A small number of professional audio products have been designed as an entirely differential balanced signal path from input to output; the audio signal never unbalances. This design is achieved by providing identical (mirrored) internal signal paths for both pin 2 and pin 3 signals (AKA "hot" and "cold" audio signals). In critical applications, a 100% differential balanced circuit design can offer better signal integrity by avoiding the extra amplifier stages or transformers required for front-end unbalancing and back-end rebalancing. Fully balanced internal circuitry has been promoted as yielding 3dB better dynamic range."

from the linn forum:

"To get the sonic improvements of balanced operation, the equipment needs to be manufactured from input to output using the balanced circuitry. Some equipment manufacturers include the balanced connections in their equipment, but the circuitry is not fully or truely balanced, and these do not offer the improvements from a balanced topology/circuitry.

I've heard people say that the biggest improvements in having a truely balanced topology is when you run long interconnects. This may be true. However, I've also heard that having a true balanced circuit does provide a noticeable sonic benefit. Some other audio manufacturers (from America) who provide the fully balanced circuitry are Audio Research, Balanced Audio Technology, Boulder, Jeff Rowland Design Group, Mark Levinson, Pass Labs.

Rotel advertises a 'balanced' design, but is not a true balanced circuitry.

True balanced circuitry is a lot more expensive than single ended circuitry (it can perhaps almost double the price -- at least the gear using it does seem to cost much much more within a manufacturer's product range). Probably, most of the really high end manufacturers do provide the true balanced circuitry. When I see this on a product that doesn't cost a lot of money and without any information to the contrary, I generally assume they are not truely balanced."

u see, the cheaper components convert the balanced signal to single-ended with a transformer or amp and then re-converts it to balanced at the output. this is not the optimum way, but it's cheaper.
there will be some improvement in sound quality though.

Thats a great explanation. Thanks for that. Then if thats the case, the only way to find out whether the M6i and M1 are truly balanced, its to obtain the circuit drawing and check whether there is a conversion stage to single ended or not.

Ahya .... Don't have to go thru' so much trouble to find out whether it's truly balanced or not. What you have there is already so much better than what most people have. They are envious and will probably drool at the sight of your equipment. Just enjoy what you have.

I know you are curious to find out. But in practical sense it doesn't make any difference unless you intend to upgrade to truly balanced equipment or is seeking one.

sflam has given some great info on the subject, which I too find enlightening. As he has mentioned, one will have to fork out big $$ to own a truly balanced equipment.

Perhaps you can contact the manufacturer if you still want to seek the info.

Sph,

Dont get me wrong, I am just stating that to fully confirm one unit is balanced or not is to understand the circuitry. Not that I am going to do it hehehe. I wish there was an easier way.

I guess the urge to know more is to help me to decide whether to spend another 1 to 2 thousands RM to purchase an XLR IC. If my set up is not truly balanced, might as well stick to RCA. Its still good and provide the right pleasure to my ears.

MF in UK has no email to contact. Have to call them.

Hehe... Audio GD might have true balance at less than 10k... Berani nak cuba tak?

adrian4454 wrote:Hehe... Audio GD might have true balance at less than 10k... Berani nak cuba tak?

Waaaahhh poison from adrian. The question remains the same, what makes the Audio GD a true balance unit?

Reading through their website, the reference 7.1 looks the deal. With high components installed.

Maybe if I can get my hand on a demo unit, then I can compare with the M1 DAC.

elhefe, as already described - the difference between XLR and RCA is that XLR has three conductors - one for the signal, one for the signal (but phase inverted), and one for ground. When the signal arrives at the destination, it is compared to the phase inverted signal and any difference is cancelled. This prevents spurious noise picked up from long cable runs from contaminating the signal.

A TRUE balanced system will run seperate signal paths from source all the way to destination. Consider a CD player sending a signal to the power amp. The preamp needs double the circuitry (to handle each signal) compared to single ended. This doubles the cost.

In practice, most manufacturers do not bother. They simply use a phase inverter and combine the two signals, run it through single ended circuitry, and then re-create the XLR signal at the output using a phase splitter. This has the potential to degrade the sound.

You therefore can not make a blanket statement that XLR is better. In my system, XLR definitely yields improvements - but then every component in my system was carefully chosen so that it is TRULY balanced from A to Z. This may not be true for everybody, and for some people (in fact, most people) - XLR will degrade the sound, due to the presence of extra circuitry that the single ended signal would not have to face.

In practice, most manufacturers do not bother. They simply use a phase inverter and combine the two signals, run it through single ended circuitry, and then re-create the XLR signal at the output using a phase splitter. This has the potential to degrade the sound.

Not potential but absolutely degrade the sound

WongKK,

Thanks for the explanation.

As per my posting above, I agree that XLR is not always better. On certain type of songs, I prefer RCA. Does that means the M6i and M1 DAC are not truly balanced?

But my question remains the same. How do we know that our kit is truly balanced? In your set up, you mentiond that it was carefully chosen.

Can you please ellaborate on that? Was it based on just technical spec given by supplier or manufacturer or there was some test or physical check of internal components?

To chip in on this matter, a reviews of the a cd player I'm using (Esoteric SA60), with one particular article from 6 moons which touched on the XLR vs RCA connection for this player. Full review:
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/esoteric9/sa60.html

Excerpts (a bit lengthy):
To wit, after the first month of listening, I was ready to throw in the towel and concede that the SA60 was just not made for me and my system. The sound was extremely clean and noise free but microdynamics were glossed over and attacks were excessively rounded over. All in all, the SA60 was very solemn and at times heavy and pompous - boringly uneventful in other words. The results did vary a bit between CD and SACD but not sufficiently so to blame it on one medium. During that first month of burning in, headphone listening did not bring much of an improvement as it does at times so I would listen to the SA60 for review purposes and go back to the Musical Fidelity A5 for enjoyment. I was getting ready to call it quits when one very early Saturday morning, sleep elusive, I decided to give the SA60 one last chance. Instead of having the headphone amplifier run off the tape loop of the McIntosh, I unplugged the balanced connections and tapped the signal directly from the SA60's RCAs.


I cued up Vivaldi's Stabat Mater with Andreas Scholl [Harmonia Mundi SACD 801571] and was instantly rewarded by one of the best presentations of this disc I have ever heard. I checked if I had not by mistake plugged the A5 back in. It really was the SA60 giving a perfect sense of flow and timing. Scholl's voice had a fascinating level of intimacy and transients were extremely well articulated with their own presence and existence. I was overwhelmed by the feeling of just "right", no excess speed or forced attacks but no lack of dynamics either, just a perfectly timed flow of music by a master counter-tenor. I was so taken that I actually played the disc twice in a row that morning. The second time the overall performance remained as captivating, with Scholl's timbre and perfect articulation finally feeling right for lack of a better word to describe timbre and timing coming together for a lifelike rendition.



Convinced that some magic of ultra-prolonged burn-in had finally struck, I reconnected the player to the main system and hit play for the third time on the same SACD. Unfortunately I heard the usual slowing down with its uncertain attacks, nothing like what I had heard two hours prior over the headphones. Not to bore you with all the experiments that followed, I eventually narrowed it down to the balanced connection between SA60 and McIntosh. Any time I used the XLRs, music lost its balance. Anytime I used the single-ended connections to the McIntosh, the A5 amplifier or the Xcan headphone amplifier, timing precision returned, images snapped back into place, attacks regained sharpness and transients lost their fuzziness. Although I've never had this problem before, I can't exclude that the McIntosh may be at least partially responsible for the problem.


If you have read Srajan's review of the X-03, you'll remember that he came to the exact opposite conclusion, clearly preferring balanced operation with this player. Although no expert on the matter, the explanation I would venture is that the X03 is a truly differential design throughout whereas the SA60 is not - and neither is my McIntosh amplifier for that matter. To use the SA60 and MA2275 with balanced interconnects, the signal has to go through two additional active devices, one phase splitter in the SA60, another address in the amplifier to patch it back together. I suspect that combination to be the source of what I heard. On the X-03, it is the balanced signal path that is the purer of the two. I do not know what preamp Srajan used but if it was balanced, it would be consistent with explaining the different results.


To put this matter to rest, I once more wrote to the Esoteric experts to share my findings and a short reply came back that I reproduce below: "The founder as well as the other "golden ears" in Japan also prefer listening to Esoteric products using unbalanced connections. The balanced potentially is quieter but there are characteristics, similar to what you are hearing, that make the unbalanced connections preferred."

But for other reviews for this particular model from MF (Michael Fremer, not our MF ) all listening was done via XLR.. http://www.stereophile.com/hirezplayers/1007eso/

Good news for me at least the player is good...

Personally, being more of a 'tinned eared' kind of person, and sucker for reviews, I stick to RCA at the moment with the SA60.

My two sens worth..

Zeebee,

To be frank, currently I myself feel that I want to stick to RCA. Just giving myself a few more weeks to listen to XLR, then decide to purchase the XLR IC or not.

elhefe, all you need to do is ask your dealer whether it is truly balanced, i.e. has double the circuitry inside. If you are not sure, open it up and take a look. You should see two copies of everything per channel. Or take a look at the XLR socket - if you see two wires going into one, then for sure it is combining the signal

A good case in point: the Einstein phono amp has a seperate XLR and RCA version. The XLR version costs almost twice the RCA.

Long story short: it is usually easier and simpler to stick to RCA. SOMETIMES XLR can be better (as it is, in my case) - but XLR interconnects cost more, the components cost more, and the margin of improvement is usually very small.

The dealer and also manual says it balanced. To open up the unit, need to wait for warranty to be over heheheh.

At the moment, just have to trust my ears. But currently, XLR is not the sound I prefer. I may try a different XLR cable brand. And se how it goes.

currently my friend loaned his diy tube pre with xlr bi-amp outputs (xlr+xlr) for a spin. even though my power amp (xpa-5) is not true balanced, my system just sounded so much better when i compared bi-amp via xlr+rca. the source is xa5400es, i was told true balanced. so the source to pre is at least true balanced.

i have not tried bi-amp via rca+rca though.

wps