XLR vs RCA vs Optical, Balanced vs Unbalanced interconnects

[hoopsontoast]

I use these:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/130743323502?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1497.l2649

(Neutrik plugs and Van Damme cable)

very well made and not expensive.

As mentioned, unless you are using long runs with balanced circuitry inside the amp/cdp then I doubt there would be any difference between a specific RCA and XLR terminated cable.

On the other hand, the XLR connector is much better in terms of design, so if you can I would from that POV.

I dont know why more companies dont use XLR for electronics connectors, or Neutrik Speakon for speakers. Much much better than RCA and Banana plugs IMO.

I have bought some Van DAmme Neutrik cables from the link above, although the RCA version. Very good value and service!

 

[L00k_C]

Why did nobody touched the optical option for connection?

My HK990 and HD990 have the so called a 'High Resolution Synchronisation' (HRS) link socket which connects to a similar one on the HK 990. This is a good idea that's been used before, sending a clock from converter to transport , so that jitter is no longer a critical issue in the digital interface. Any ideas how good this is ?

Both the HD and the HK 990 feature HK's own digital filtering implementation 'RLS iV', and both have a balanced analogue connection alongside regular phono sockets, giving a choice of fiveways to connect the two: unbalanced or balanced analogue, optical or electrical S/PDIF and HRS.

Any FINAL suggestions for the five options I have? :wall: :wall:

 

[andyjm]

A third wire could link the ground pins, but what for? That would not be a typical balanced cable configuration. The shield needs to be grounded, or it doesn't work as a shield.

you don't need a shield in case of symmetrical interconnects. the advantage of such construction is that if there's any noise picked up along the way it'll be cancelled out. in fact you don't need shielding in case of asymmetrical interconnects too but in such an instance you don't get benefits of RFI rejection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_audio

Typical balanced configuration explained here, note the use of the shielding braid. Feel free to submit your corrections to the Wiki with your own technical know how.

Shielding is a 'nice to have', not an essential. Unless your PC is wireless, that ethernet cable coming out of the back is balanced twisted pair with no shielding between the different pairs. If you have seen a multicore phone cable in a roadside cabinet with tens of pairs of phone circuits, no shielding between the pairs, but minimal crosstalk because of the balanced nature of the transmission and the twisted pair construction.

 

[andyjm]

Why did nobody touched the optical option for connection?

My HK990 and HD990 have the so called a 'High Resolution Synchronisation' (HRS) link socket which connects to a similar one on the HK 990. This is a good idea that's been used before, sending a clock from converter to transport , so that jitter is no longer a critical issue in the digital interface. Any ideas how good this is ?

Both the HD and the HK 990 feature HK's own digital filtering implementation 'RLS iV', and both have a balanced analogue connection alongside regular phono sockets, giving a choice of fiveways to connect the two: unbalanced or balanced analogue, optical or electrical S/PDIF and HRS.

Any FINAL suggestions for the five options I have? :wall: :wall:

The technical arguments are:

1. If you are going to use the DAC in the converter, then forget optical or coax S/PDIF as the interface isn't very good. Use the proprietary HRS word clock system - at least the link won't be introducing jitter.

2. If you want to go the analogue route, there should be nothing to choose between RCA and balanced. As I have posted before, there are likely to be more steps in the balanced chain, so the possibility exists for RCA to sound better - but unlikely to be audible. If you are running the cables for many metres, in parallel with other audio and mains leads, or adjacent to an arc welder, go with the balanced.

There is always the remote chance that whoever designed the equipment stuffed up one or more of the inputs / outputs - so given that interconnects are cheap (unless you are into buying audio jewelry) give them all a try and see if you can convince yourself that there is a difference.

 

[L00k_C]

Why did nobody touched the optical option for connection?

My HK990 and HD990 have the so called a 'High Resolution Synchronisation' (HRS) link socket which connects to a similar one on the HK 990. This is a good idea that's been used before, sending a clock from converter to transport , so that jitter is no longer a critical issue in the digital interface. Any ideas how good this is ?

Both the HD and the HK 990 feature HK's own digital filtering implementation 'RLS iV', and both have a balanced analogue connection alongside regular phono sockets, giving a choice of fiveways to connect the two: unbalanced or balanced analogue, optical or electrical S/PDIF and HRS.

Any FINAL suggestions for the five options I have? :wall: :wall:

The technical arguments are:

1. If you are going to use the DAC in the converter, then forget optical or coax S/PDIF as the interface isn't very good. Use the proprietary HRS word clock system - at least the link won't be introducing jitter.

2. If you want to go the analogue route, there should be nothing to choose between RCA and balanced. As I have posted before, there are likely to be more steps in the balanced chain, so the possibility exists for RCA to sound better - but unlikely to be audible. If you are running the cables for many metres, in parallel with other audio and mains leads, or adjacent to an arc welder, go with the balanced.

There is always the remote chance that whoever designed the equipment stuffed up one or more of the inputs / outputs - so given that interconnects are cheap (unless you are into buying audio jewelry) give them all a try and see if you can convince yourself that there is a difference.

Thanks. My only hesitation with HRS is that it is a CAT6 rj45 cable and it has a 'preset' thicknes of wires. With RCA you can buy thicker wires and that means better/more transfer of signal?

Or you are saying it is BETTER to resolve the Jitter issue than the signal 'strength' and cable quality?

Am I right?

 

[andyjm]

Why did nobody touched the optical option for connection?

My HK990 and HD990 have the so called a 'High Resolution Synchronisation' (HRS) link socket which connects to a similar one on the HK 990. This is a good idea that's been used before, sending a clock from converter to transport , so that jitter is no longer a critical issue in the digital interface. Any ideas how good this is ?

Both the HD and the HK 990 feature HK's own digital filtering implementation 'RLS iV', and both have a balanced analogue connection alongside regular phono sockets, giving a choice of fiveways to connect the two: unbalanced or balanced analogue, optical or electrical S/PDIF and HRS.

Any FINAL suggestions for the five options I have? :wall: :wall:

The technical arguments are:

1. If you are going to use the DAC in the converter, then forget optical or coax S/PDIF as the interface isn't very good. Use the proprietary HRS word clock system - at least the link won't be introducing jitter.

2. If you want to go the analogue route, there should be nothing to choose between RCA and balanced. As I have posted before, there are likely to be more steps in the balanced chain, so the possibility exists for RCA to sound better - but unlikely to be audible. If you are running the cables for many metres, in parallel with other audio and mains leads, or adjacent to an arc welder, go with the balanced.

There is always the remote chance that whoever designed the equipment stuffed up one or more of the inputs / outputs - so given that interconnects are cheap (unless you are into buying audio jewelry) give them all a try and see if you can convince yourself that there is a difference.

Thanks. My only hesitation with HRS is that it is a CAT6 rj45 cable and it has a 'preset' thicknes of wires. With RCA you can buy thicker wires and that means better/more transfer of signal?

Or you are saying it is BETTER to resolve the Jitter issue than the signal 'strength' and cable quality?

Am I right?

The current flows in the HRS interconnects you describe are very small, the Cat6 cable is more than adequate to carry them. In this case size does not matter, as long as the data is getting through the cable without error, there is no benefit to have thicker cables.

S/PDIF is a slightly different animal. It is a bit of a dogs breakfast in that it carries both digital data and a sample clock. Having the correct characteristic impedance cable, correctly terminated, can make a difference to the amount of jitter introduced into the clock. Thicker isn't better, but having the right type of coax can matter.

The best place to have the clock is right next the the A2D converter chip, so all other things being equal, using the HRS link should be better than S/PDIF.

 

[the record spot]

Rather than getting shirty with people, why don't you just plug a few in and see which option works best for you? This seems like an exercise you can resolve on your own given as it's itemised in the HK manuals for the products, you've had substantial feedback from various qualified people and it's personal preference.

I've heard the amp and cd payer you have and they're excellent. This was through an RCA connection. Incidentally the returns are minimal in my experience.

 

[L00k_C]

Rather than getting shirty with people, why don't you just plug a few in and see which option works best for you? This seems like an exercise you can resolve on your own given as it's itemised in the HK manuals for the products, you've had substantial feedback from various qualified people and it's personal preference.

I've heard the amp and cd payer you have and they're excellent. This was through an RCA connection. Incidentally the returns are minimal in my experience.

Pardon me!!!!

What might be obvious to you might not be true for others! What is easy for you might not be for others!

As it is a matter of money and availalabilty (I do not have option to test and return, or option to buy one where I am), I rest in the kidness and wisdom of others to narrow down my options?

Would I buy (order from internet that is) XLR or RCA? would it cost 10 quit or 500 quit? You can not have this wide range of options.. you have to narrow them down....

You are VERY lucky to have audio centers in your country and have a demo different options and combinations.. and even better if you can demo them especially at your premises.... I DON'T

and by the way.... you can always feel free not to read or write anything if you are so fed up with me.....

Thanks Guys...

 

[SteveR750]

Resurrecting this, I have just bought some supposedly high quality XLR leads to connect the DM+ ("balanced") to the M2, also "balanced". Not sure if they are missing anything that much more expensive "hi-fi" XLR cables have, other than snake oil? For £15 it;s worth trying.

I cannot post the link, spam filter won't let me, but they are Neutrik Male to Femnale XLR, gold plated terminals, silver plated OFC conductors from professionalaudiocables.co.uk