Balanced to Unbalanced

A basic adapter cable - Balanced (XLR or TRS) to Unbalanced (TS or RCA). There seem to be several ways to wire it, depending on the design of the output stage of the balanced connection, but I can find no reference that defines which I should used.

Here (I think) are my options for the XLR to RCA case:

(Main reference: Rane Technical Staff, 2015, Rane Note #110, Sound System Interconnection, Figure 4, Cases 3 and 5.)

The main choice is between A (pin 3 “floating” aka disconnected) and B-C (pin 3 tied - grounded - to Pin 1)

I understand that the answer depends on whether the output stage of the balanced connection is “servo-balanced” or “cross-coupled” or “transformer-balanced” or “active” or “passive” or “electronically balanced” or a few other terms I have seen, but I’m clueless as to which of these terms implies whether I should tie Pin 3 to pin 1.

It would be great if someone could identify which of the above terms in a product description correspond to whether to use A or B/C - i.e. whether to tie Pin 1 to Pin 3 at the source end.

Servo-balanced?

Cross-Coupled?

Transformer-balanced?

Active?

Passive?

Electronically balanced?

Any other terms??

Thanks for any info!!

I’d just grab an ART CleanBox Pro.

Thanks for the suggestions … however …

An off-the-shelf unit is not really ideal for me. I travel to all performance situations, and often don’t know what the setup will be. I have a big bag of cables and adapters that let me interface with any possible house system setup. Gear gets shipped (UPS, in Pelican cases), so size and weight need to be minimized.

I am now finding that I need to expand my setup to account for output to subwoofers as well as input from other performers who want to go through my rig (and have me mix them).

I really need several more adapter cables to handle these situations, rather than a stack of boxes.

Moreover, the Art CleanBox Pro is (looking at their block diagram) handling CMR within the box and sending through an unbal signal with a grounded low side. I would like to keep the CMR through the (possibly longish) run to the unbalanced unit and, if possible, use scheme C above (which, I have read, preserves maybe 20-30 dB of CMR).

So I’m back to trying to figure out, based on the terms in the source unit (“Cross coupled”, “servo-balanced”, …) which scheme I should use.

I always thought that
Servo-Balanced = Active = Electronically balanced (Less expensive, compact, light)
and
Transformer-balanced = passive = cross-coupled (heavy, older, expensive)

Active involves two opamps/ICs with equal but opposite output polarities to build a +/- waveform across XLR pins 2 and 3 (1 is shield)

Passive is transformer outs to XLR pins 2 and 3 (1 is shield)

Transformer Output Pin 3 can be grounded to shield (Pin1) at low voltages (like audio signals) to create a non-balanced signal. High voltage (> coil insulation breakdown) will destroy the transformer (such as house AC).

Typically, old gear or new expensive gear has transformers and can be internally inspected to confirm. Plus, there should be a measurable resistance from Pin 2 to Pin 3. I’m thinking <600 Ohms, but it could vary with equipment. If an OEM has transformers, you can bet they are going to be advertising that spec ($$).

I’m not sure what resistance would be read across the opamps/ICs in an active balance situation. But, I’d guess that specs with high output impendences (10kOmms) are opamps/ICs. The balanced output resistance across a Lexicon Alpha is 11kOhm which I would expect to be an opamp/active balanced system. The balanced output across a UAD 176 (Old Time Balanced Transformers) is 240 Ohms. This is not impedance, this is static resistance. I’m very proud of my 176 (Picture during build below). Output Transformer is the middle silver box between the turret boards.

Best plan is to try a cable that is NOT shorting XLR pins 1 and 3 and see what happens if you cannot confirm presence of output transformer. OK to short pin 1 to 3 if transformer. Not OK to short if no transformer.

2 Likes

Wow @easteelreath … deeper than I had intended going, but I have not seen this kind of info before, and maybe I can begin making sense of all this … Thanks!!!

Just one question before diving deeper into the rabbit hole: are you the “balanced” or the “unbalanced” part of the connection? Are you looking to send an unbalanced signal to a balanced house or is it the other way round - the house is providing an unbalanced input and you are sending a balanced signal from your outputs?

My question is what part of the equation are you in control of and what part is the unknown you want to prepare for?

1 Like

Thanks for helping me out on this one @Torsten !

I am either the source or destination, in different situations.

  • Sometimes I need to run my mixer output (CQ20B) to an unbalanced house subwoofer (hit that situation several times), and

  • sometimes I need to take a balanced feed through an unbalanced input (this happens when we fly internationally and can ship gear and I use an unbalanced through input on one of my Aira units to take a feed from another performer going through my rig).

I have the case of converting unbalanced-to-balanced AOK (I am using Rane Note #110, Sound System Interconnection, Figure 4, Cases 13 and 14).

It’s the balanced-to-unbalanced cases that cause heartburn, because of the potential for distortion, equipment damage, and the desire to preserve at least part of the CMR ratio …

So why don’t you pick up an inline matching transformer? They cost about $20 and are Good Enough for many situations.

OK, let’s stay pragmatic here and not overcomplicate things

Let’s get CMR out of the way first: CMR works by sending two reversed copies of the signal (“+” and “-”) to the destination and inverting the “-” part at that destination before summing again. That way, any additive outside interference is canceled out when it gets “summed in reverse”. Also, you get a higher signal level, since the “inverted -” and the “+” parts are added.

When you connect your equipment to an unbalanced destination, this “inversion and summing” part doesn’t take place, so the key mechanism for CMR rejection is missing. If there is any CMR rejection by connecting “-” to ground, this is just due to some of the reversed signal interfering with ground levels, kind of a “parasitical effect”. Honestly, in a live situation, I would completely ignore that and treat the connection as an unbalanced connection and be done with that. Keep the unbalanced connection short - or if it is a longer connection with risk of interference, use a balanced connection to your destination and then convert to unbalanced right before the destination using e.g. a DI box.

Generally, I wouldn’t worry too much about interference with line level signals (at least at typical stage cable lengths); that’s more critical with microphone level signals, where there is a bit of boosting involved at the destination…

Now on your scenarios: in both cases you are feeding an unbalanced input from a balanced output. In each case, the input can only deal with a “signal” and a “ground” - the “+” and “-” inversion and summation isn’t there. So the question is: can you simply connect the “+” signal to tip and the “ground” to sleeve and be done with it?

The answer to that lies in the construction of the balanced output. If you have an output stage that provides the “+” and “-” parts in isolation (independent of the rest of the circuitry), the “+” only makes sense vis-a-vis the “-”; it doesn’t have a clear reference to the “ground”, so just sending “+” and “ground” to your destination will be problematic. In this case, you’ll need to connect “-” and “ground”, so your unbalanced signal has a clear reference between “+” and “ground”. This is typically the case with transformer-balanced outputs, which are pretty rare and typically only used in high-level equipment (e.g. the UA 1176 compressor), not in your typical run-of-the-mill audio interface or mainstream mixer.

For transformer-balanced outputs, you definitely NEED to connect pins 1 and 3 on the XLR side to get a valid unbalanced signal. The advantage of transformer-balanced outputs: you don’t lose half of your signal strength that way, since the difference between + and - gets fed into your signal.

The more typical case for run-of-the-mill equipment (servo-balanced, active, electronically balanced, …) is that the output stage creates both the “+” and the “-” signal against the “ground” reference, so both parts of the balanced signal have a clearly defined reference against ground. In these cases, it is enough to simply pick the “+” and the “ground” signal and send them off to your unbalanced destination using an unbalanced connection. Connecting the “-” part of the signal to ground will effectively create a short between “-” and ground. Typical output stages should have sufficient output resistance that this shorting won’t hurt your equipment, but why run the risk of damage - I would leave the “-” part open in these cases.

So overall, you’d be best set with a “type A” cable for most typical situations. If there really is a transformer-balanced output involved somewhere, you can simply insert an adapter piece of XLR to XLR before your type A cable that connects 1 and 3 and presents the combined signal to your type A cable. Now you’re prepared for both cases - start with the type A cable, and if something doesn’t work out, insert the adapter.

And: since the mixer is your own equipment, you can test that ahead of time and reduce the “unknowns”.

Not sure about the signal from your other performer: is that a known piece of equipment that you can clarify and test before travelling to the gig? That way, all unknowns are resolved, and you can confidently pack what you need.

Cheers,

Torsten

5 Likes

Wow oh WOW … what a fantastic explanation. Have not seen such a clear and detailed analysis …

I believe I am getting beaten back by the complexity of doing this “in the field” (i.e. setting up for a gig) and will likely fall back on a transformer based setup for Bal => Unbal. I do have several EBTech Hum Eliminators (which, I believe are transformer-based) or look into a Jensen-based Radial J-ISO unit.

Thanks again so much!!

… END of main message … continue if (and only if) you are in the mood for a horror story (one of my motivations for trying to understand all this) …

I get to Mexico for three performances in 4 days. Could not ship gear, so I’m traveling lean. I’m rendering my wind controller using several hardware synths.

For some reason, the sound system we’re using (I find out just before the first show) sounds just great as long as it is not plugged in to main power. Turns out the entire rig is somehow battery-powered. Mixer, main speakers, monitors, the whole mess is run on batteries.

I tactfully inform them that I NEED main power to get any sound. So I try plugging in to the wall and to their system and, sure enough, blazing noise and hummmm.

Solution: Run my sound through my crappy little table monitor (a Bose SoundLink) and mic that (yes, with a battery-powered mic). Sounded like I was playing under water.

Sigh.

I could not help thinking that a DI box or ground lift adapter or isolation transformer in the right place could probably have solved the whole mess.

Postscript: all three Mexico gigs were charity concerts, and folks were extremely appreciative for our efforts.

I would simply carry a set of “type A” cables plus one or two of the adapters I mentioned. When setting up, try the type A cable first - in 99% of cases, you should be good. If not, try the adapter.

Don’t overthink this - get out your soldering iron, knock together a couple of cables and adapters and just have that stuff around. NOTE: mark them well, so you know that these are special purpose cables…

Having a couple of anti-hum transformers in your bag can’t really hurt if you have them. The Radial unit is very nice (there’s also a very helpful equivalent for the “other way” - feeding unbalanced sources into your desk without tons of buzz and hum - that’s the Pro AV2) and it helps you eliminate nasty ground loops, but spending this serious money just to adapt balanced to unbalanced is overkill.

But if you run into “exotic” situations like your Mexican Experience frequently, having a couple of passive DIs and transformer boxes, both balanced and unbalanced, can be a godsend… I always carry a couple of various problem-solvers of that kind in my mixer bag.

Cheers,

Torsten

probably: all these 50Hz (or 60Hz depending on where you are) issues are typically caused by differences in “ground” signal, plus the fact that “signal ground” is often also “chassis ground”, which has to do with the device’s main power connection. As soon as your signal is referenced against “ground” (and that is the case with all unbalanced connections), there is a risk of ground loops and other nasty stuff.

Inserting a transformer-based adapter (DI box, etc) essentially cuts the connection of the ground levels between two devices, leaving each with its own “ground”. No more competing ground levels, and typically hum goes away.

Between using balanced connections wherever possible and using DI boxes / transformer isolators or other funky little helpers to sever nasty ground loops, you can get most setups to cooperate.

Super important (in my experience) is also managing power sources: I try to feed the entire backline from ONE power port and distribute power in a “tree structure” to all devices. That gives you a good basis for at least a coherent “power ground” - a lot of issues stem from “chassis ground” competing with “signal ground”.

But that’s another can of worms…

Just to add to the debate, I used balanced via TRS or XLR where I can, as why would you not if available? I have the output of my gig rack as balanced, passive transformer coupled to avoid ground loops, and where needed I will use unbalanced, because, as Torsten says, at line level over short distances who is going to notice any induced noise?

I carry adaptors and an active stereo DI box for the “just in case” risk mitigation.

So far I have never had problems with getting a working solution at any venue with any sound man (either hired in, venue provided or we do it ourselves).

1 Like