Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.

htm

Elliott Sound Products Balanced Interfaces

Design of High-Performance Balanced Audio Interfaces
Bill Whitlock - Jensen Transformers, Inc. (Edited By Rod Elliott)
Copyright © 2010 - Bill Whitlock & Rod Elliott (ESP)
Facebook Twitter More 2

Articles Index
Main Index

Contents

Foreword (ESP)
Foreword (Bill Whitlock)
Introduction
The Balanced Interface
History And 600Ω Lines
Balanced Line Receivers
Testing Balanced Line Receivers
A New Line Receiver Circuit
The New Circuit IC Details
Balanced Line Drivers
Cables For Balanced Lines
Shield-Current-Induced Noise
The Pin 1 Problem
Design Checklist
Conclusion (ESP)
References
Copyright Notices

Foreword (ESP)

Firstly, I'd like to thank Bill Whitlock for giving permission to re-publish this material. There is
a great deal of confusion, disinformation and unmitigated nonsense on the Net when it
comes to any discussion of balanced systems. The following material unashamedly
recommends Jensen transformers and the THAT Corporation's InGenius® IC that was
patented by Bill, and provides far better performance in critical applications than any of the
standard active balanced receivers.

The remainder of the material (which is copious) covers the principles involved in great
detail. It is important to understand that one of the biggest issues with any balanced
connection is the so-called 'Pin 1 Problem', where noise is injected into the equipment
circuitry from the cable shield. As noted within the article, randomly disconnecting one end
or the other of a cable's shield is almost always a bad idea - the problem must be solved
within the equipment. Disconnecting the mains safety earth is always a bad idea. It is
provided to ensure safety, and is especially important with 230V (50Hz) mains.

While Bill's material was originally dedicated to 120V 60Hz systems, where necessary I have
included the relevant information for 230V 50Hz countries. Bear in mind that UL certification
has no meaning outside the US and Canada, and local regulations can be quite variable.
Many countries (including Australia) now follow the European (IEC) regulations fairly closely,

1 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

so if in doubt, you must verify that what you intend to do is legal where you live.

As noted within the text, the 600Ω line came from the early telephone systems - as did a vast
amount of the technology that we now take for granted. Telephone engineering was at the
very forefront of early electronics, and much as we love to hate telephone companies, we
owe the early pioneers a great deal for their contributions to audio. While not relevant to this
article, it's worth noting that modern 'phone lines are no longer considered to be a nice
resistive 600 ohms in most countries. Various 'complex' impedance models are now used
instead, because they resemble an actual line more accurately than a simple resistive
impedance. Impedance matching (to the 'new' complex impedance) and longitudinal
balance are just as important as ever for analogue telephone lines that are extended to
millions of households from local exchanges (central offices) throughout the world.

One point needs to be made, and that is the correct wiring for an XLR or stereo phone plug
(TRS - tip, ring and sleeve). The proper connections are shown below, and while there have
been deviations they are essentially an abomination. The 'Pin 3 Hot' technique was used by
some US manufacturers for unbalanced inputs, simply to save time! A single bus was used
to bridge pins 1 and 2 along the length of unbalanced inputs, because it was easy (therefore
fast and cheap). It was a bad idea then, and it's still a bad idea. Pin 2 is 'Hot' - end of story!

XLR And TRS (Tip, Ring & Sleeve) Connections

I haven't shown the 'TRRS' (tip, ring, ring & sleeve) because it's generally only used for
mobile (cell) phones and some tablets and/or other consumer devices. While the sleeve is
supposed to be earth/ ground, a certain company (that makes iThings) managed to stuff that
up, by deciding that the sleeve would be for the mic connection. A seriously bad idea, but
others had to follow suit so headsets and the like would be compatible. Others are also
guilty of making changes that were neither necessary nor desirable (some video cameras for
example). Unfortunately, when 'marketing' gets a say in design, the result is very often an
abortion!

The text below is close to verbatim - metric measurements have been added where
necessary. All diagrams have been re-drawn to reflect normal ESP styles and to reduce
image size, but are otherwise unchanged. Where additional comments have been made,
these are indented, in italics and show a small ESP logo at the end ... like this .

To download a copy of Bill's original PDF from which this material was taken, click here and
have a look at the transformer range and other material on the Jensen Transformers
website.

Please note: the earth (ground) symbol used in the diagrams below is different from that shown in
Bill's original PDF, but it has exactly the same meaning. There is no consensus on the 'correct'
symbols for earth/ ground/ chassis, and several different interpretations are to be found with only a
cursory search. In all drawings, the earth symbol used indicates the common or 'zero voltage' point
of the circuit. This may or may not be connected to protective earth (known as 'earth ground' in the
US) and may or may not be connected to the chassis. Bill's original drawings are no different in this
respect. I have had one (yes, only one) complaint that the symbols I used are wrong, which I
dispute. The 'triangles' used in the original drawings are used to indicate the common, and are also

2 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

commonly reserved for distinction between analogue and digital earth/ ground points, and often have
an 'A' or 'D' within to indicate the difference. However, there are no 'universally' accepted symbols -
with the possible exception of the earth symbol shown in the drawings herein, but surrounded by a
circle. This means 'protective earth' - i.e. the earth pin on a mains plug or receptacle.

Foreword (Bill Whitlock)

High signal-to-noise ratio is an important goal for most audio systems. However, AC power
connections unavoidably create ground voltage differences, magnetic fields, and electric
fields. Balanced interfaces, in theory, are totally immune to such interference. For 50 years,
virtually all audio equipment used transformers at its balanced inputs and outputs. Their
high noise rejection was taken for granted and the reason for it all but forgotten. The
transformer's extremely high common-mode impedance - about a thousand times that of its
solid-state 'equivalents' - is the reason. Traditional input stages will be discussed and
compared. A novel IC that compares favourably to the best transformers will be described.
Widespread misunderstanding of the meaning of 'balance' as well as the underlying theory
has resulted in all-too-common design mistakes in modern equipment and seriously flawed
testing methods. Therefore, noise rejection in today's real-world systems is often inadequate
or marginal. Other topics will include tradeoffs in output stage design, effects of non-ideal
cables, and the 'pin 1 problem'.

Introduction

The task of transferring an analog audio signal from one system component to another while
avoiding audible contamination is anything but trivial. The dynamic range of a system is the
ratio, generally measured in dB, of its maximum undistorted output signal to its residual
output noise or noise floor. Fielder has shown that up to 120dB of dynamic range may be
required in high-performance sound systems in typical homes [ 1 ]. The trend in professional
audio systems is toward increasing dynamic range, fueled largely by increasing resolution in
available digital converters. Analogue signals accumulate noise as they flow through system
equipment and cables. Once noise is added to a signal, it's essentially impossible to remove
it without altering or degrading the original signal.

Therefore, noise and interference must be prevented along the entire signal path. Of
course, a predictable amount of random or 'white' noise, sometimes called 'the eternal hiss',
is inherent in all electronic devices and must be expected. Excess random noise is generally
a gain structure problem, a topic beyond the scope of this paper.

Ground noise, usually heard as hum , buzz, clicks or pops in

audio signals, is generally the most noticeable and irritating -
in fact, even if its level is significantly lower than background
hiss, it can still be heard by listeners. Ground noise is
caused by ground voltage differences between the system
components. Most systems consist of at least two devices
which operate on utility AC power. Although hum, buzz,
clicks, and pops are often blamed on 'improper grounding', in
most cases there is actually nothing improper about the
system grounding. To assure safety, all user accessible
connections and the equipment enclosure must be
connected to the safety ground conductor of the AC power
system. A properly installed, fully code-compliant AC power distribution system will develop
small, entirely safe voltage differences between the safety grounds of all outlets. In general,
the lowest voltage differences (generally under 10 millivolts) w ill exist between physically
close outlets on the same branch circuit and the highest (up to several volts) will exist
between physically distant outlets on different branch circuits. These normally insignificant
voltages cause problems only when they exist between vulnerable points in a system - which
is more unfortunate than improper. Users who don't understand its purpose will often defeat
equipment safety grounding - a practice that is both illegal and extremely dangerous.

Safety must take precedence over all other considerations!

3 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Although UL-approved (or other country specific approval) equipment supplied with a
2-prong power cord is safe, its normal leakage current can also create troublesome ground
voltage differences. This topic, as well as unbalanced interfaces, is also beyond the scope
of this paper.

Ground noise is very often the most serious problem in an audio system . As Bruce Hofer
wrote: "Many engineers and contractors have learned from experience that there are far
more audible problems in the real world than failing to achieve 0.001% residual distortion
specs or DC-to-light frequency response." [ 2 ]. Carefully designed and executed system
grounding schemes can reduce ground voltage differences somewhat but cannot totally
eliminate them. The use of 'balanced' line drivers, shielded 'balanced' twisted-pair cables,
and 'balanced' line receivers is a long standing practice in professional audio systems. It is
tantalising to assume that the use of 'balanced' outputs, cables, and inputs can be relied
upon to virtually eliminate such noise contamination. In theory, it is a perfect solution to the
ground noise problem, but very important details of reducing the theory to practice are widely
misunderstood by most equipment designers. Therefore, the equipment they design may
work perfectly on the test bench, but become an annoying headache when connected into a
system. Many designers, as well as installers and users, believe grounding and interfacing
is a 'black art'. College electrical engineering courses rarely even mention practical issues of
grounding.

It's no wonder that myth and misinformation have become epidemic!

The Balanced Interface

The purpose of a balanced audio interface is to efficiently transfer signal voltage from driver
to receiver while rejecting ground noise. Used with suitable cables, the interface can also
reject interference caused by external electric and magnetic fields acting on the cable. The
true nature of balanced interfaces is widely misunderstood. For example "Each conductor is
always equal in voltage but opposite in polarity to the other. The circuit that receives this
signal in the mixer is called a differential amplifier and this opposing polarity of the
conductors is essential for its operation." [ 3 ]. This, like many explanations in print (some in
otherwise respectable books), describes signal symmetry - "equal in voltage but opposite in
polarity" - but fails to even mention the single most important feature of a balanced interface.

SIGNAL SYMMETRY HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH NOISE REJECTION -

IMPEDANCE IS WHAT MATTERS!

A good, accurate definition is "A balanced circuit is a two-conductor circuit in which both
conductors and all circuits connected to them have the same impedance with respect to
ground and to all other conductors. The purpose of balancing is to make the noise pickup
equal in both conductors, in which case it will be a common-mode signal which can be made
to cancel out in the load." [ 4 ].

The impedances, with respect to ground, of the two lines is what defines an interface as
balanced or unbalanced.

In an unbalanced interface, one line is grounded, making its impedance zero. In a balanced
interface, the two lines have equal impedance. It's also important to understand that line
impedances are affected by everything connected to them. This includes the line driver, the
line or cable itself, and the line receiver. The line receiver uses a differential amplifier to
reject common-mode voltages. The IEEE Dictionary defines a differential amplifier as "an
amplifier that produces an output only in response to a potential difference between its input
terminals (differential-mode signal) and in which output due to common-mode interference
voltages on both its input terminals is suppressed" [ 5 ]. Since transformers have intrinsic
differential response, any amplifier preceded by an appropriate transformer becomes a
differential amplifier.

4 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Figure 1 - Basic Differential Interface Circuit

The basic theory of the balanced interface is straightforward. (For purposes of this
discussion, assume that the ground reference of Device A has a noise voltage, which we will
call 'ground noise', with respect to the Device B ground reference.) If we look at the HI and
LO inputs of Device B with respect to its ground reference, we see audio signals (if present)
plus the ground noise. If the voltage dividers consisting of ZO/2 and ZCM on each of the lines
have identical ratios , we'll see identical noise voltages at the two inputs of Device B.

Since there is no difference in the two noise voltages, the differential amplifier has no output
and the noise is said to be rejected. Since the audio signal from Device A generates a
voltage difference between the Device B inputs, it appears at the output of the differential
amplifier. Therefore, we can completely reject the ground noise if the voltage divider ratios
are perfectly matched. In the real world, we can't perfectly match the voltage dividers to get
infinite rejection. But if we want 120 dB of rejection, for example, we must match them to
within 0.0001% or 1 part per million!

Figure 2 - Equivalent Circuit of Basic Differential Interface Circuit

The ground noise received from Device A, since it exists on or is common to both wires, is
called the common-mode voltage and the differential amplifier provides common mode
rejection. The ratio of differential or normal-mode (signal) gain to the common-mode (ground
noise) gain of the interface is called the common mode rejection ratio or CMRR (called
'longitudinal balance' by telephone engineers) and is usually expressed in dB. There is an
excellent treatment of this subject in Morrison's book [ 6 ].

If we re-draw the interface as shown in Figure 2, it takes the familiar form of a Wheatstone
bridge. The ground noise is 'excitation' for the bridge and represented as Vcm (common
mode voltage). The common mode impedances of the line driver and receiver are
represented by RCM+ and RCM-.

When the + and - arms have identical ratios, the bridge is 'nulled' and zero voltage difference
exists between the lines - infinite common-mode rejection. If the impedance ratios of the two
arms are imperfectly matched, mode conversion occurs. Some of the ground noise now
appears across the line as noise.

5 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

The bridge is most sensitive to small fractional impedance changes in one of its arms when
all arms have the same impedance [ 7 ]. It is least sensitive when upper and lower arms have
widely differing impedances. For example, if the lower arms have infinite impedance, no
voltage difference can be developed across the line, regardless of the mismatch severity in
upper arm impedances. A similar scenario occurs if the upper arms have zero impedance.
Therefore, we can minimise CMRR degradation due to normal component tolerances by
making common-mode impedances very low at one end of the line and very high at the other
[8]
. The output impedances of virtually all real line drivers are determined by series resistors
(and often coupling capacitors) that typically have ±5% tolerances. Therefore, typical line
drivers can have output impedance imbalances in the vicinity of 10 ohms. The common-
mode input impedances of conventional line receivers is in the 10 k to 50 k ohm range,
making their CMRR exquisitely sensitive to normal component tolerances in line drivers. For
example, the CMRR of the widely used SSM-2141 will degrade some 25 dB with only a 1
ohm imbalance in the line driver.

Line receivers using input transformers (or the InGenius® IC discussed later) are essentially
unaffected by imbalances as high as several hundred ohms because their common-mode
input impedances are around 50 M ohms - over 1000 times that of conventional 'active'
receivers.

Note that this discussion has barely mentioned the audio signal itself. The mechanism that
allows noise to enter the signal path works whether an audio signal is present or not. Only
balanced impedances of the lines stop it - signal symmetry is irrelevant. When subtracted (in
the differential amplifier), asymmetrical signals: +1 minus 0 or 0 minus -1 produce exactly the
same output as symmetrical signals: +0.5 minus -0.5. This issue was neatly summarised in
the following excerpt from the informative annex of IEC Standard 60268-3:

"Therefore, only the common-mode impedance balance of the driver, line, and
receiver play a role in noise or interference rejection. This noise or interference
rejection property is independent of the presence of a desired differential signal.
Therefore, it can make no difference whether the desired signal exists entirely on
one line, as a greater voltage on one line than the other, or as equal voltages on
both of them. Symmetry of the desired signal has advantages, but they concern
headroom and crosstalk, not noise or interference rejection."

History And 600Ω Lines

The first widespread users of balanced circuits were the early telephone companies. Their
earliest systems had no amplifiers yet needed to deliver maximum audio power from one
telephone to another up to 32km (20 miles) away. It's well known that, with a signal source
of a given impedance, maximum power will be delivered to a load with the same, or
matched, impedance. It is also well known that 'reflections' and 'standing waves' will occur in
a transmission line unless both ends are terminated in the line's characteristic impedance.
Because signal propagation time through over 30km of line is a significant fraction of a signal
cycle at the highest signal frequency, equipment at each end needed to match the line's
characteristic impedance to avoid frequency response errors due to reflections. Telegraph
companies used a vast network with a huge installed base of open wire pair transmission
lines strung along wooden poles. Early telephone companies arranged to use these lines
rather than install their own. Typical lines used #6 AWG wire at 12 inch spacing and the
characteristic impedance was about 600 ohms, varying by about ±10% for commonly used
variations in wire size and spacing [ 9 ]. Therefore 600 ohms became the standard
impedance for these balanced duplex (bi-directional) wire pairs and subsequently most
telephone equipment in general.

Not only did these lines need to reject ground voltage differences, but the lines also needed
to reject electric and magnetic field interference created by AC power lines, which frequently
ran parallel to the phone lines for miles. Balanced and impedance matched transmission
lines were clearly necessary for acceptable operation of the early telephone system. Later,
to make 'long distance' calls possible, it was necessary to separate the duplexed

6 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

send/receive signals for unidirectional amplification. The passive 'telephone hybrid' was
used for the purpose and its proper operation depends critically on matched 600 ohm source
and load impedances. Telephone equipment and practices eventually found their way into
radio broadcasting and, later, into recording and professional audio - hence, the pervasive
600 ohm impedance specification.

Figure 3 - Impedance Matched Source and Destination Circuits

In professional audio, however, the goal of the signal transmission system is to deliver
maximum voltage, not maximum power. To do this, devices need low differential (signal)
output impedances and high differential (signal) input impedances. This practice is the
subject of a 1978 IEC standard requiring output impedances to be 50 ohms or less and input
impedances to be 10 k or more [ 10 ].

Sometimes called 'voltage matching', it minimises the effects of cable capacitances and also
allows an output to simultaneously drive multiple inputs with minimal level losses. With rare
exceptions, such as telephone equipment interfaces, the use of matched 600 ohm sources
and loads in modern audio systems is simply unnecessary and compromises performance.

Where voltage matching techniques are used in (analogue) telecommunications

systems, it is referred to as 'bridging'. The high impedance balanced load is
bridged across the 'phone line, allowing signal capture only. This technique is not
especially common but is used for line monitoring. It is expected that the
telephone line is properly terminated at both ends when bridging is used .

Balanced Line Receivers

Since performance of the differential line receiver is the most important determinant to
system CMRR performance and can, in fact, reduce the effects of other degradation
mechanisms , we'll discuss it first. There are two basic types of differential amplifiers: active
circuits and transformers. Active circuits are made of op-amps and precision resistor
networks to perform algebraic subtraction of the two input signals. The transformer is an
inherently differential device which provides electrical isolation of input and output signals.

The active differential amplifier , sometimes called an 'actively balanced input' is realisable in
several circuit topologies. These circuits are well known and have been analysed and
compared in some detail by others [ 11, 12, 13, 14 ].

In our discussion here, we will assume that op-amps, resistors, and resistor ratios are ideal
and not a source of error. The following schematics are four popular versions in their most
basic form, stripped of AC coupling, RFI filtering, etc. Because the common-mode input
impedances, from either input to ground [ 15 ], are all 20 k ohms, these four circuits have
identical CMRR performance. Even when perfectly matched, these impedances are the
downfall of this approach. To quote Morrison: "many devices may be differential in character
but not all are applicable in solving the basic instrumentation problem" [ 16 ].

7 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Figure 4 - Common Actively Balanced Receiver Circuits

The following graph shows the extreme sensitivity of 60 Hz CMRR vs source impedance
imbalance for these circuits. These circuits are almost always tested and specified with
either perfectly balanced sources or shorted inputs. In real equipment, imbalances
commonly range from 0.2 ohm to 20 ohms, resulting in real-world interface CMRR that's far
less than that advertised for the line receiver.

Figure 5 - CMRR vs. Input Source Imbalance in Percent and Ohms

8 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

There are other problems:

1. The single and current mode dual opamp circuits must trade off common-mode input
impedance for noise. For example, because of the high value resistors, the single
opamp circuit will have a noise output of about -105 dBu, where 0 dBu = 0.775 V RMS.

If it operates on ±15 V rails, it will have a maximum output of about +20 dBu, giving it a
total dynamic range of 125 dB. This may be marginal in some recording systems. If
the resistor values are doubled, which will decrease CMRR sensitivity to source
impedance imbalance, noise will increase by 3 dB.

2. Many circuits use electrolytic coupling capacitors, which generally have loose
tolerances and drift with age, at their inputs which degrades low frequency CMRR by
unbalancing the common-mode input impedances.

3. Suppression of RF common-mode voltages, to prevent subsequent demodulation by

the op-amps, is another tradeoff for these circuits. Often 1000 pF capacitors are added
from each input to ground to attenuate RF. Unless they are very precisely matched,
they will unbalance the common-mode input impedance and degrade high frequency
CMRR. Also, because they lower common-mode input impedances, they increase
high frequency CMRR sensitivity to source impedance imbalance. This is a very tricky
tradeoff.

4. The common-mode voltage range is limited to ±10 to ±15 volts for most circuits. At
high signal levels, common-mode range can approach zero because the limit applies to
the sum of the peak signal and the peak common-mode voltages [ 17, 18 ]. This can
cause problems in electrically hostile environments such as remote recording trucks or
sound reinforcement systems operating near high powered lighting equipment or
cables.

5. The single opamp design also has a property that seems confounding [ 19 ]. Its
common-mode input impedances are identical (when voltages at input X and input Y
are equal), but its differential signal input impedances are not symmetrical about
ground. Obviously, if driven from a zero impedance balanced ground referenced
source, voltages at X and Y are forced to be identical. Real world 'floating' sources,
which have high common-mode output impedances, will experience signal magnitude
unbalances, typically around 3 dB, when used with this receiver. In fact, if driven by an
ideal floating source (infinite common-mode impedances), all signal voltage will appear
at input X and none at input Y . This is an imaginary problem that has led some
designers to 'fix' it by adjusting resistor ratios. In their misguided quest for signal
symmetry, they have inadvertently done massive damage to the CMRR of the input
stage!

9 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Figure 6 - 'Traditional' Balanced Input Circuit Analysis

An audio transformer couples a signal magnetically while maintaining electrical (aka

galvanic) isolation between input and output. It is an inherently differential device, requiring
no trimming and its differential properties are stable for life. The next graph shows a circuit
simulation model for a Jensen JT-10KB-D line input transformer.

Figure 7 - High Performance Input Transformer Circuit Simulation Model

Resistance in Ohms, capacitors in Farads, and inductance in Henrys.

Unit suffix used in place of decimal point - 3p8 = 3.8pF, 1k25 = 1.25k, etc.

Inductances marked * vary inversely with frequency, increasing at ~3dB / octave down to ~1Hz
Value shown as 1kH applies at 20Hz, and that shown as 22mH applies at 100kHz

Values shown are typical only.

Its common-mode input impedances are determined by the 50 pF capacitances of the

primary to the Faraday shield, which is grounded, and small parasitic capacitances to the
secondary, one end of which is usually grounded. These high common-mode input
impedances, about 50 M ohms at 60 Hz and 1 M ohms at 3 kHz, are responsible its relative

10 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

insensitivity to large source impedance imbalances, as shown in the previous graph. There
are other advantages, too:

1. A transformer can transform or 'match' the impedance of the balanced line to the
optimum source resistance for the subsequent amplifier to maximise signal-to-noise
ratio. Noise figure is a measure of signal-to-noise degradation caused by an amplifier
and it is lowest when the amplifier is fed from its optimum source resistance [ 20 ].
Although this is especially relevant to microphone input stages, it's also an important
consideration for wide-dynamic-range line input stages. A well designed transformer-
coupled line input stage operating from ±15 volt power rails can easily attain 140 dB of
dynamic range.

2. RF common-mode attenuation is also inherent in transformers with Faraday shielding.

Since it compares normal-mode to common-mode response, CMRR is not a useful
measure of this attenuation. The normal mode 3 dB frequency is about 180 kHz for the
Jensen JT-10KB-D. Its common-mode attenuation is typically over 30 dB from 200
kHz to 10 MHz. If necessary, RF attenuation can be increased with a simple external
low-pass filter network.

3. Input common-mode voltage range in a transformer depends only on the insulation

materials used in its construction. Breakdown typically exceeds ±350 V peak.

Testing Balanced Line Receivers

Noise rejection in a real-world balanced interface is often far less than that touted for th e
receiving input. That's because the performance of balanced inputs have traditionally been
measured in ways that ignore the effects of line driver and cable impedance imbalances.
For example, the old IEC method essentially 'tweaked' the driving source impedance until it
had zero imbalance. Another method, which simply ties the two inputs together and is still
used by many engineers, is equally unrealistic and its results essentially meaningless. This
author is pleased to have convinced the IEC, with the help of John Woodgate, to adopt a
new CMRR test that inserts realistic impedance imbalances in the driving source. The new
test is part of the third edition of IEC Standard 60268-3, Sound System Equipment - Part 3:
Amplifiers, issued in August 2000. A schematic of the old and new test methods is shown
below. It's very important to understand that noise rejection in a balanced interface isn't just
a function of the receiver - actual performance in a real system depends on how the driver,
cable, and receiver interact.

11 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Figure 8 - IEC Normal-Mode and Common-Mode Test Circuits

A New Line Receiver Circuit

The new circuit uses a technique known as 'bootstrapping' to raise the AC common-mode
input impedance of the receiver to over 10 M ohms at audio frequencies. The schematic
below shows the basic technique. By driving the lower end of R2 to nearly same AC voltage
as the upper end, current flow through R2 is greatly reduced, effectively increasing its value.
At DC, of course, Z is simply R1 + R2. If gain G is unity, for frequencies within the passband
of the high-pass filter formed by C and R1, the effective value of R2 is increased and will
approach infinity at sufficiently high frequencies. For example, if R1 and R2 are 10k each,
the input impedance at DC is 20 k. This resistance provides a DC path for amplifier bias
current as well as leakage current that might flow from a signal source. At higher
frequencies, the bootstrap greatly increases the input impedance, limited ultimately by the
gain and bandwidth of amplifier G. Impedances greater than 10 M ohms across the audio
spectrum can be achieved. Another widely used balanced input circuit is called an
instrumentation amplifier. The circuit shown below is a standard instrumentation amplifier
modified to have its input bias resistors , R1 and R2, bootstrapped. Note that its common-
mode gain, from inputs to outputs of A1 and A2, is unity regardless of any differential gain
that may be set by RF and RG. The common-mode voltage appearing at the junction of R3
and R4 is buffered by unity gain buffer A4 which, through capacitor C, AC bootstraps input
resistors R1 and R2. To AC common-mode voltages, the circuit's input impedances are
1000 or more times the values of R1 and R2, but to differential signals, R1 and R2 have their
normal values, making the signal input impedance R1 + R2. Note that capacitor C is not part
of the differential signal path, so signal response extends to DC. The bootstrapping does not
become part of the (differential) signal path.

12 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Figure 9 - Input Bootstrap Circuit Raises Impedance

The new circuit also has advantages in suppressing RF interference. Audio transformers
inherently contain passive low-pass filters, removing most RF energy before it reaches the
first amplifier. In well-designed equipment, RF suppressing low-pass filters must precede the
active input stages. A widely-used circuit is shown below. At 10 kHz, these capacitors alone
will lower common-mode input impedances to about 16 k ohms. This seriously degrades
high frequency CMRR with real-world sources, even if the capacitors are perfectly matched.
A tradeoff exists because shunt capacitors must have values large enough to make an
effective low-pass filter, but small enough to keep the common-mode input impedances
high. The new circuit eases this tradeoff.

Figure 10 - Input Low-Pass Filter for RF Suppression

The circuit above also shows how bootstrapping can make the effective value of these
capacitors small within the audio band yet become their full value at RF frequencies . By
forcing the lower end of C2 to the same AC voltage as the upper, current flow through C2 is
greatly reduced, effectively decreasing its value. If gain G is unity, at frequencies below the
cutoff frequency of the low-pass filter formed by R and C1, the effective value of C2 will
approach zero. At very high frequencies, of course, the effective capacitance is simply that
of C1 and C2 in series (C1 is generally much larger than C2). For example, if R = 2 k ohms,
C1 = 1 nF, C2 = 100 pF, and G = 0.99, the effective capacitance is only 15 pF at 10 kHz, but
increases to 91 pF at 100 kHz or higher. The schematic below shows a complete input
stage with bootstrapping of input resistors R1/ R2 and RF filter capacitors C1/ C2. Series
filter elements X1 and X2 can be resistors or inductors, which provide additional RFI
suppression. A paper by Whitlock describes these circuits in much greater detail [ 8 ].

The New Circuit IC Details

The InGenius® circuit, covered by US Patent 5,568,561, is licensed to THAT Corporation.

The silicon implementation differs from the discrete solution in many respects. Since all
critical components are integrated, a well controlled interaction between resistor values and
metal traces can be duplicated with similar performance from die to die. But the integration

13 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

of certain components creates new challenges.

Figure 11 - InGenius® Differential Amplifier

The process used by THAT Corporation for this device is 40-volt Complementary Bipolar
Dielectric Isolation (DI) with Thin Film (TF). The DI process has remarkable advantages.
Truly high performance PNP and NPN transistors, as good as their discrete counterparts,
can be made on the same piece of silicon. Each device is placed in a tub that's isolated
from the substrate by a thick layer of oxide. This, unlike more conventional Junction Isolated
(JI) processes, makes it possible to achieve hundreds of volts of isolation between individual
transistors and the substrate. The lack of substrate connection has several advantages. It
minimises stray capacitance to the substrate (usually connected to the negative rail),
therefore wider bandwidths can be achieved with a simpler, fully complementary circuit
design. Also, it makes possible stable operational amplifier designs with high slew rates. In
fact, the typical slew rate of the InGenius® line receiver is better than 10 V/µs.

The op-amp design topology used is a folded cascode with PNP front end, chosen for better
noise performance. The folded cascode achieves high gain in one stage and requires only a
simple stability compensation network. Moreover, the input voltage range of a cascode
structure is greater than most other front ends. The output driver has a novel output stage
that is the subject of U S patent 6,160,451. The new topology achieves the same drive
current and overall performance as a more traditional output stage but uses less silicon area.

The InGenius® design requires very high performance resistors. Most of the available
diffused resistors in a traditional silicon process have relatively high distortion and poor
matching. The solution is to use thin film (TF) resistors. The family of thin film resistors
include compounds such as, Nichrome (NiCr), Tantalum Nitride (TaNi) and Sichrome (SiCr).
Each compound is suitable for a certain range of resistor values. In InGenius, SiCr thin film
is used due to its stability over time and temperature and sheet resistance that minimises the
total die area. Thin-film on-chip resistors offer amazing accuracy and matching via laser
trimming, but are more fragile than regular resistors, especially when subjected to
Electrostatic Discharge (ESD). Careful layout design was required to ensure that the
resistors can withstand the stress of ESD events.

The CMRR and gain accuracy performance depend critically on matching of resistors. The
integrated environment makes it possible to achieve matching that would be practically
impossible in a discrete implementation. Typical resistor matching, achieved by laser
trimming, in the InGenius® IC is 0.005%, which delivers about 90 dB of CMRR. In absolute
numbers, this means the typical resistor and metal error across all resistors is no greater
than 0.35 ohms! Discrete implementations with such performance are very difficult to
achieve and would be extremely expensive.

Real-world environments for input and output stages require ESD protection. Putting it on
the chip, especially for an IC that can accept input voltages higher than the supply rails,

14 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

posed interesting challenges. The conventional solution is to connect reverse-biased

protection diodes from all pins to the power pins. In the InGenius® IC, this works for all pins
except the input pins because they can swing to voltages higher than the power supply rails.
For the input pins, THAT's designers developed a lateral protection diode with a breakdown
voltage of about 70 volts that could be fabricated using the same diffusion and implant
sequences used for the rest of the IC.

Balanced Line Drivers

There are three basic types of line drivers: ground referenced, active floating, and
transformer floating. Schematics in Figure 12 show simplified schematics of each type
connected to an ideal line receiver having a common-mode input impedance of exactly 20 k
ohms per input. (Differential or signal voltage generators are shown in each diagram for
clarity, but for common-mode noise analysis the generators are considered short circuits.
The receiver ground is considered the zero signal reference and the driver ground is at
common-mode voltage with respect to the receiver ground.)

Figure 12 - Balanced Line Driver Topologies

The following graph in Figure 13 compares simulated CMRR performance of the three
sources with this receiver setup. The ground referenced source has two anti-phase voltage
sources, each referenced to driver ground. The resistive common-mode output impedances
are Rs1 and Rs2. The differential output impedance ROD is simply RS1 + Rs2. The common-
mode voltage VCM is fed into both line branches through RS1 and RS2. VCM appears at the
line receiver attenuated by two voltage dividers formed by RS1 and 20 k ohms in one branch
and RS2 and 20 k ohms in the other.

15 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Figure 13 - Balanced Line Driver Performance

As discussed previously, ratio matching errors in these two voltage dividers will degrade
CMRR. (It could be argued that Rs1 need not equal Rs2 and that the common-mode input
impedances need not match because this condition is not necessary for ratio matching.
However, equality is necessary if we wish to allow interchange of system devices.)

Since typical values for RS1 and RS2 are 20 ohms to 100 ohms each with independent
tolerances of ±1% to ±10%, worst case source impedance imbalance could range from 0.4
ohms to 20 ohms. With these imbalances, system CMRR will degrade to 94 dB for 0.4
ohms, or to 60 dB for 20 ohms. Since the imbalances are resistive, CMRR is constant over
the audio frequency range. The active floating source is built around a basic circuit
consisting of two opamps cross-coupled with both negative and positive feedback to emulate
a floating voltage source. The resistive common-mode output impedances are RCM1 and
RCM2. The differential output impedance is ROD. The common-mode voltage VCM is fed into
both line branches through RCM1 and RCM2. VCM appears at the line receiver attenuated by
two voltage dividers formed by RCM1 and 20 k ohms in one branch and RCM2 and 20 k ohms
in the other, with ROD across the line. ROD is typically 50 to 100 ohms. Since the common-
mode output impedances of this circuit are increased by precise balancing of resistor ratios
which also interact with output signal balance (symmetry), adjustment is difficult and values
for RCM1 and RCM2 are not specified directly. One manufacturer of this circuit specifies output
common mode rejection (OCMR) by the BBC test method [ 21 ]. The results of this test can
be used to determine the effective values of RCM1 and RCM2 using computer-aided circuit
analysis. Values of 5.3 k ohms and 58.5 k ohms were found for a simulated part having
OCMR and SBR (signal balance ratio) performance slightly better than the 'typical'
specification. For this simulated part, system CMRR was degraded to 57 dB. Since the
imbalances are resistive, CMRR is constant over the audio frequency range.

The transformer floating source consists of a transformer whose primary is driven by an

amplifier whose output impedance is effectively zero by virtue of conventional negative
feedback. The common-mode output impedances Ccm1 and Ccm2 consist of the
interwinding capacitance for multi-filar wound types, or the secondary to shield capacitance
for Faraday shielded types. Differential output impedance ROD is the sum of secondary and

16 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

reflected primary winding resistances. For typical bi-filar transformers, CCM1 and CCM2 range
from 7 nF to 20 nF each, matching to within 2%. Typical ROD range is 35 to 100 ohms.
System CMRR will be 110 dB to 120 dB at 20 Hz, decreasing at 6 dB per octave since the
unbalances are capacitive, to 85 dB to 95 dB at 500 Hz, above which it becomes frequency
independent. If, instead of the active receiver, a Jensen JT-10KB-D input transformer is
used, its full CMRR capability of about 125 dB at 60 Hz and 85 dB at 3 kHz is realised with
any of the sources and conditions described above.

The GROUNDED LOAD behavior of these three sources is an important consideration if

unbalanced inputs are to be driven. Of course, for any line driver, either output should be
capable of withstanding an accidental short to ground or to the other line indefinitely without
damage or component failure. This is best accomplished with current limiting and thermal
shutdown features.

The GROUND REFERENCED source will output abnormally high currents into a grounded
line. Hopefully, it will current limit, overheat, and shut down. If not, at the system level, it will
be forcing high, and probably distorted, currents to a remote ground. These currents, as
they return to the driver, will circulate through the grounding network and become common-
mode voltages to other devices in the system. The usual symptom is described as
'crosstalk'.

The ACTIVE FLOATING source compromises CMRR, output magnitude balance, and high
frequency stability in quest of a 'transformer-like' ability to drive a grounded or 'single-ended'
input. However, to remain stable, the grounded output must be carefully grounded at the
driver [ 22, 23 ]. Since this makes the system completely unbalanced, it is a serious
disadvantage.

The TRANSFORMER FLOATING source breaks the ground connection between the driver
and the unbalanced input. Because the transformer secondary is able to 'reference' its
output to the unbalanced input ground, power line hum is reduced by more than 70 dB in the
typical situation shown in the schematic in Figure 14. Because the ground noise is
capacitively coupled through Ccm1, reduction decreases linearly with frequency to about 40
dB at 3 kHz.

With the transformer floating source, if it is known that an output line will be grounded, an
appropriate step can be taken to optimise performance. With a differentially driven
transformer, drive should be removed from the corresponding end of the primary to reduce
signal current in the remotely grounded output line. In the case of single-ended driven
transformer, simply choose the secondary line corresponding to the grounded end of the
primary for grounding.

Figure 14 - Transformer Output Driving Unbalanced Input

Grounding one output line at the driver, which is required to guarantee stability of most
'active floating' circuits, degenerates the interface to a completely unbalanced one having no
ground noise rejection at all.

17 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

Cables For Balanced Lines

The primary effects on system behavior caused by the interconnecting shielded twisted pair
(often called STP) cable is caused by the capacitance of its inner conductors to the shield.
The two inner conductors of widely used 22 gauge foil shielded twisted pair cable, when
driven 'common-mode', exhibit a capacitance to the shield of about 220pF per metre (67 pF
per foot). But the capacitance unbalance can be considerable. Measurements on samples
of two popular brands of this cable showed capacitance unbalances of 3.83% and 3.89%,
with the black wire having the highest capacitance in both cases. On one sample, insulation
thickness was calculated from outside diameter measurements and assumed that the
stranded conductors in both wires conductors were identical. The black insulation was 2.1%
thinner and, since capacitance varies as the inverse square of the thickness, this would
seem to explain the unbalance.

Figure 15 - Effects Of Cable Shield Terminations

Perhaps this topic needs some attention from cable manufacturers. This is important
because, if the cable shield is grounded at the receive end, these capacitances and the
output impedances of the driver form two low-pass filters. Unless these two filters match
exactly, requiring an exact match of both driver output impedances and cable capacitances,
mode conversion will take place. Such conversion is aggravated by long cables and
unbalanced driver impedances. Because of its high common-mode output impedances, the
active floating driver is very vulnerable to this conversion mechanism. Its cable shields must
be grounded only at the driver end.

But this conversion CAN be avoided. The upper schematic shows how the common-mode
noise is low-pass filtered. Remember that our reference point is the receiver 'ground'. If we
simply ground the cable shield at the driver end instead, as shown in the lower schematic, no
common-mode voltage appears across the cable capacitances and no filters are formed!
Since the shield now is at the common-mode voltage and so are both driver outputs, there is
no common-mode voltage across the cable capacitances and they effectively 'disappear'.
As far as the common-mode voltage on the signal conductors is concerned, the cable
capacitances are now in parallel with the source impedances, virtually eliminating the
unbalancing effects of the capacitances.

Grounding of shields at both driver and receiver creates an interesting tradeoff. The cable
effects will, predictably, fall between the two schemes described above. The 'advantage' is
that, because it connects the two chassis, it can reduce the common-mode voltage itself

18 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

even though it may degrade the receiver's rejection of it, especially as we approach 20 kHz.
It would be far better, of course, to use some other means, such as a dedicated grounding
system or even the utility safety ground (power cord 3rd prong), to restrain common-mode
voltage. Devices with no safety ground (two prong power cords) are the most offensive in
this regard, with their chassis voltage often well over 50 volts AC with respect to system
safety ground. The current available is very small, posing no safety hazard, but it creates a
very large common-mode voltage unless somehow restrained. As we mentioned earlier, it is
NOT necessary to have symmetrical signals on the balanced line in order to reject common-
mode noise.

Signal symmetry is a practical consideration to cancel capacitively coupled signal currents

which would otherwise flow in the cable shield. In a real system, there will be some signal
currents flowing in the shield because of either signal asymmetry or capacitance imbalance
in the cable. If the cable shield is grounded only at the driver, these currents will harmlessly
flow back to the driver and have no system-level effects. But if the shield is grounded only at
the receiver, these currents will return to the driver only after circulating through remote
portions of the grounding system. Because the currents rise with frequency, they can cause
very strange symptoms or even ultrasonic oscillations at the system level.

Sometimes, especially with very long cables, leaving the shield 'floating' at the receive end
may result in increased RF common-mode voltage at the receiver because of antenna
effects and high RF fields. To minimise this potential problem, a 'hybrid' scheme can be
used to effectively ground the receive-end shield only for RF [ 24 ].

Shield-Current-Induced Noise

There is yet another reason not to solidly ground the shield at the receive end of the cable.
When interference currents flow in their shield, certain cables induce normal-mode noise in
the balanced pair. Details on this subject are covered in AES papers by Neil Muncy and
Brown-Whitlock. Both conclude that cables utilising a drain wire with the shield are far worse
than those using a braided shield without drain wire [ 25, 26 ].

The 'Pin 1 Problem'

Dubbed the 'pin 1 problem' (pin 1 is shield in XLR connectors) by Neil Muncy, common-
impedance coupling has been inadvertently designed into a surprising number of products
with balanced interfaces. As Neil says, "Balancing is thus acquiring a tarnished reputation,
which it does not deserve. This is indeed a curious situation. Balanced line-level
interconnections are supposed to ensure noise-free system performance, but often they do
not" [ 26 ].

Figure 16 - Pin 1 Problem Allows Shield Currents to Flow in Signal Circuitry

The pin 1 problem effectively turns the SHIELD connection into a very low-impedance
SIGNAL input! As shown in Figure 16, shield current, consisting mainly of power-line noise,
is allowed to flow in internal wiring or circuit board traces shared by amplifier circuitry. The
tiny voltage drops created are amplified and appear at the device output. When this problem

19 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

exists in systems, it can interact with other noise coupling mechanisms to make noise
problems seem nonsensical and unpredictable. The problem afflicts equipment with
unbalanced interfaces, too. Fortunately, there is a simple test to reveal the pin 1 problem.
The 'hummer' is an idea suggested by John Windt [ 27 ]. This simple device, which might
consist of only a 'wall-wart' transformer and a resistor, forces an AC current of about 50 mA
through suspect shield connections in the device under test. In properly designed
equipment, this causes no additional noise at the equipment output.

Design Checklist

The following steps will ensure that your equipment doesn't create noise problems in real-
world systems ...

1. Avoid designed-in pin 1 problems. Bond shield pins of all inputs and outputs as directly
as possible to the conductive equipment enclosure/safety ground. If plastic PCB-
mounted connectors are used on a non-metallic panel, bond the shield pins to the
widest possible PCB foil area, connecting it as directly as possible to power supply
common and keeping it isolated from the signal circuitry ground plane or network. In a
real-world system, noise currents at frequencies from power-line to UHF may flow from
connector to connector and from connectors to power line - give the current the
shortest, most direct path possible! Figure 17 may help with the concept. The box on
the right implements 'hybrid' grounding of its input connector, reducing audio frequency
shield current.

Figure 17 - Avoid Pin 1 Problem with Separate Pathways for Shield Currents

2. Improve receiver CMRR. Conventional balanced line receiver circuits usually deliver
marginal CMRR when connected to real-world equipment instead of laboratory signal
generators. Replacing these receivers with either high-quality transformers or
InGenius® integrated circuits can improve CMRR by 50 dB or more in real systems.

3. Keep RF interference outside. Enclose the equipment in a metallic enclosure or, if the
enclosure is non-metallic, apply a conductive coating to its interior and ground it.
Consider replacing XLR connectors with new versions having integral capacitors
and/or ferrite suppressors to prevent RF entry via this route. For line inputs, a switch
can then be used to open the pin 1 connection for highest possible CMRR at audio
frequencies. Since microphones are not independently grounded and phantom-
powered varieties use the cable shield to carry power, such a switch can't be used at
microphone inputs. Of course, appropriate measures should be used to prevent RF
entry via other cables (power, data, etc.) as well.

4. Minimise the effects of AC magnetic fields. Minimise the loop area of high-current
paths (power transformer-rectifier-input capacitor, for example) in the power supply to
reduce its radiated magnetic field. Likewise, minimise the loop area of signal paths to
prevent noise induction from magnetic fields both inside and outside the enclosure.
One way to do this is to tightly twist all balanced pair wiring and keep balanced pair
traces as physically close as possible.

20 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

5. Design output stages for low output impedance. A differential output impedance of 50
ohms or less is highly desirable. Damped inductor load isolators, consisting of a small
inductors (about 5 µH) in parallel with resistors (about 50 ohms), are preferred over
'build-out' resistors. Inductive isolators have near-zero impedance at audio
frequencies, minimising line receiver CMRR degradation due to both output impedance
and cable capacitance imbalances. However, at MHz frequencies, their impedance
approaches 50 ohms, preventing possible instability or oscillation of the line driver.

6. Use a differential amplifier at the beginning of the signal chain. This may sound
obvious, but some designers are so convinced that balance means only signal
symmetry that they design power amplifiers having two independent ground referenced
signal chains, which rely on symmetry of the balanced input signal to provide
symmetrical drive for push-pull output tubes. A prime function of the differential
amplifier is to remove common-mode content from the input signal. In this topology
without a differential amplifier, each signal chain also amplifies common-mode noise.
The output transformer primary has very low impedance to common-mode drive, which
causes abnormally high plate current. This can result in severe inter-modulation
distortion and, in some cases, damaged output valves (tubes).

This work is based in part on a 1994 AES paper by this author [ 28 ].

There is a lot of info on the Net about shielding and the so-called 'Pin 1' problem.
In particular, Rane has produced some technical notes that will be useful (see [ 29 ]
and [ 30 ]), but manufacturers and home builders don't always get it right. In some
cases you may find that RF (radio frequency) energy manages to get through
despite your very best efforts. Mobile (cell) phones are (or were, depending on
the technology used) a potentially useful source of RF for testing, and most
people in the industry will be acquainted with the noise made by mobiles. VHF
analogue TV transmitters were the bane of many recording studios and live
performances, but digital broadcasting seems to have minimised that source of
interference. However, many areas will still have analogue TV, so grounding is
still a very important part of the set-up.

Conclusion (ESP)

If the information in this article seems to be more complex than you expected, that's because
few explanations have ever gone into the level of detail that's needed to understand
balanced interfaces properly. Many people have considered balanced lines to be a panacea,
but unless the equipment is designed properly there are many opportunities to mess up the
entire process. Properly set up balanced interfaces can ensure trouble-free signal transfer
for long distances in very (electrically) noisy environments, but if the proper precautions
aren't taken the end result can be just as bad as using completely unbalanced
interconnections.

As Bill has pointed out very clearly, the expectation that a balanced connection will have
equal but opposite signals on each line is not required. Many very expensive microphones
use a scheme where only one signal line is driven. Provided the impedances are matched
as described, this method works perfectly. I have previously described this method of
obtaining a balanced connection as "Hey, that's cheating" - be that as it may, it works just as
well as the 'real thing'. The only down side is that only half the level is available.

For many applications, the use of balanced interconnects is simply not needed at all. In
general, a home hi-fi needs balanced interconnects like a fish needs a bicycle, but someone,
somewhere, decided that balanced connections 'sound better', but not because of noise
reduction. Balanced connections are not used because they sound better or even different
from any other. They are used where mains earth (ground) noise causes (or may cause)
interference to the signal.

There is also an all pervading myth that only a balanced connection can be truly noise-free

21 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

when run for long distances. Many very expensive and highly specified sound measurement
microphones use a simple coaxial cable and a BNC connector, with a special 'current loop'
power supply. The cables can be run for 50 metres or more in virtually any environment
without any concern for noise (or hum) pickup. This is equipment at the forefront of both
technology and cost, and an unbalanced connection is not used to save a few dollars ...
quite the reverse.

Where balanced connections are used (from different pieces of powered equipment), one
useful trick is to connect pin 1 of the input XLR connector to chassis via a parallel resistor
and capacitor. The resistor prevents high current loops but maintains the electrical
connection, and the capacitor shorts any RF noise to chassis. Typical values are 10 ohms in
parallel with 100nF. For equipment that will be used for live work (concerts etc.), the resistor
should be rated for at least 5W, because a simple connection error during setup can easily
burn out lesser resistors. It's not unknown for even metal-clad 20W resistors used in this
way to fail (sometimes catastrophically) given a worst case connection mistake. The use of
XLR connectors used to be quite common for speaker connections (a very poor choice, but
phone/ jack plugs and sockets are much worse!), and a speaker lead plugged into an
amplifier input can cause some serious damage.

I urge the reader to re-read this article as many times as necessary to ensure that everything
is thoroughly understood. Despite having been with us for a very long time, the 'simple'
balanced interface is still the source of more myth and misinformation than any other. A
good understanding of the principles, methods and most importantly the reasons for using
balanced interfaces will help dispel many long-held but often false beliefs.

Finally, when in doubt or for a 'mission critical' application - USE A TRANSFORMER. The
transformer's most attractive and endearing characteristics are that it provides true galvanic
isolation (no electrical connection between source and destination electronics) and it has an
inherently fully differential output and/or input. If available, winding centre taps should not be
connected to ground or to anything else. The exception is when the centre tap is used for
phantom power ... which must be connected to the P48V supply via a resistor. Never direct
connect the centre tap to the P48 supply voltage. While not exactly standard, a 3.3k resistor
may be used without any problems.

References

1. Fielder, L., Dynamic Range Issues in the Modern Digital Audio Environment, Journal of
the Audio Engineering Society,May 1995, pp. 322-339.
2. B. Hofer, Transformers in Audio Design, Sound & Video Contractor, March 15, 1986,
p. 24.
3. A. Keltz, Unbalanced vs. Balanced Lines and Cables, Technical Articles, Whirlwind
USA
4. H. Ott, Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems, Second Edition, John
Wiley & Sons, 1988, p. 116.
5. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., IEEE Standard Dictionary of
Electrical and Electronic Terms, Second Edition, ANSI/IEEE Std 100-1977, Wiley
Interscience, 1978, p. 177.
6. R. Morrison, Grounding and Shielding Techniques in Instrumentation, Third Edition,
John Wiley & Sons, 1986, pp. 55-61.
7. Reference Data for Radio Engineers, Fifth Edition, Howard W. Sams, 1972, p. 11-1.
8. B. Whitlock, A New Balanced Input Circuit for Maximum Common-Mode Rejection in
Real-World Environments, Audio Engineering Society 101st Convention, 1996
Preprint #4372
9. Federal Telephone and Radio Corporation, Reference Data for Radio Engineers,
Second Edition , J.J. Little & Ives, 1946, p. 180.
10. Publication 268-15, Sound System Equipment, International Electro-technical
Commission, 1978, Part 15, Chapter 11, Section 4 - Preferred Matching Values.
11. J. Graeme, G. Tobey, L. Huelsman, Operational Amplifiers, Design and Applications,
McGraw-Hill, 1971, pp. 201-207.

22 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45
Balanced Interfaces https://sound-au.com/articles/balanced-2.htm

12. R. Morrison, op. cit., pp. 70-75.

13. R. Cabot, Active Balanced Inputs & Outputs, Sound & Video Contractor, March 15,
1986, pp. 32-34.
14. W. Jung, A. Garcia, Op-Amps in Line Driver and Receiver Circuits, Part 2, Analog
Dialog, 27-1, 1993.
15. J. Graeme, G. Tobey, and L. Huelsman, Operational Amplifiers, Design and
Applications, McGraw-Hill, 1971, p 441.
16. R. Morrison, op. cit., p. 58.
17. J. Graeme, Applications of Operational Amplifiers - Third Generation Techniques,
McGraw-Hill, 1973, pp. 53-57.
18. C. Perkins, To Hum or Not to Hum, Sound & Video Contractor, March 15, 1986, p. 42.
19. D. Bohn, Analog I/O Standards, Application Note 102, Rane Corporation, 1982.
20. C. Motchenbacher, F. Fitchen, Low-Noise Electronic Design, John Wiley & Sons,
1973, pp. 34-35.
21. Analog Devices, Inc., SSM-2142 Balanced Line Driver Data Sheet, Rev A, 1992
Audio/Video Reference Manual, pp. 7-139 to 7-144.
22. T. Hay, Differential Technology in Recording Consoles and the Impact of
Transformerless Circuitry on Grounding Technique, AES 67th Convention Preprint
1723, 1980, p. 9.
23. Analog Devices, Inc., op. cit., p. 7-144.
24. R. Morrison, op. cit., p. 86.
25. J. Brown and B. Whitlock, Common-Mode to Differential-Mode Conversion in
Shielded Twisted-Pair Cables (Shield-Current-Induced Noise), Audio Engineering
Society 114th Convention, 2003.
26. N. Muncy, Noise Susceptibility in Analog and Digital Signal Processing Systems,
Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, June 1995, pp. 435-453.
27. J. Windt, An Easily Implemented Procedure for Identifying Potential Electromagnetic
Compatibility Problems in New Equipment and Existing Systems: The Hummer Test,
Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, June 1995, pp. 484-487.
28. B. Whitlock, Balanced Lines in Audio Systems: Fact, Fiction, and Transformers,
Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, June 1995, pp. 460-462.
29. Grounding and Shielding Audio Devices - Steve Macatee, RaneNote 151, written 1995,
revised 2002
30. Pin 1 Revisited - Jim Brown, Audio Systems Group, RaneNote 165, ©2003 Syn-Aud-
Con"

Main Index
Articles Index

Copyright Notice. This article, including but not limited to all text and diagrams, is the intellectual property of
Bill Whitlock (parts © Rod Elliott), and is Copyright © 2010. Reproduction or re-publication by any means
whatsoever, whether electronic, mechanical or electro- mechanical, is strictly prohibited under International
Copyright laws. The author (Bill Whitlock) and editor (Rod Elliott) grant the reader the right to use this
information for personal use only, and further allows that one (1) copy may be made for reference.
Commercial use is prohibited without express written authorisation from Bill Whitlock and Rod Elliott.
Page created and copyright © Bill Whitlock & Rod Elliott, 19 January 2010./ Updated June 2020 - Added XLR and TRS pinouts

23 of 23 25/10/2020 13:45