XLR and AES/EBU Cables

[Bob Leonard]

I was thinking of using an aes/ebu xlr cable to connect my pre-amp to my amplifier. Whould this kind of connection couse less fidelity.

 

[lovinthehd]

Generally the advantage of a balanced xlr cable is over long distances to reduce potential for electrical noise. The signal will be just fine either long or short...

 

[Joe B]

I was thinking of using an aes/ebu xlr cable to connect my pre-amp to my amplifier. Whould this kind of connection couse less fidelity.

Less fidelity than RCA cables? Definitely not.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

AES/EBU is Pro version of SPDIF. Even the physical connectivity looks the same, the signal is digital.
The connection between your pre-amp and amp is analog thus you'd be using just balanced XLR cables.
Nothing to do with AES/EBU.

As for benefits, if you're already using shielded unbalanced interconnects of short length (under 10ft) switching to XLR is unlikely to provide noticeable improvements. Well you'd get few extra DB in SNR and Dynamic range, but as either way - very unlikely you'd notice any difference except placebo.

 

[lovinthehd]

Shoulda looked up the AES/EBU aspect

 

[Joe B]

AES/EBU is Pro version of SPDIF. Even the physical connectivity looks the same, the signal is digital.
The connection between your pre-amp and amp is analog thus you'd be using just balanced XLR cables.
Nothing to do with AES/EBU.

As for benefits, if you're already using shielded unbalanced interconnects of short length (under 10ft) switching to XLR is unlikely to provide noticeable improvements. Well you'd get few extra DB in SNR and Dynamic range, but as either way - very unlikely you'd notice any difference except placebo.

AES/EBU cables are spec'd to pass digital signals, but they will function perfectly as balanced XLR cables (bluejeanscable.com).

 

[Bob Leonard]

Thanks for the insight. Is there a difference between the standard xlr vs aes/ebu xlr. I have two of the aes/ebu varietie xlr’s and would like to use them in my setup.

 

[Joe B]

From what I understand, the AES/EBU cables are low-capacitance, which means you get less signal loss and can use the cables in longer runs (probably not applicable to your situation).

Your original question was would this type of connection cause less fidelity. The answer is a definite NO. Will it improve fidelity? Probably not; but why not give it a try.

 

[Speedskater]

In on location pro audio, you often see 100 meter (300 foot) mic and interconnect cables. Seldom do those cables have super low capacitance specs.
As to improving signal quality, well post #4 covered that.
But RCA inputs have been Overtaken By Events (OBE).

 

[Johnny2Bad]

One of the purported advantages of balanced cable is the construction minimizes the effect of the cable itself ... in other words exotic unbalanced (RCA-RCA) construction has less effect on the sonics when built as a balanced (XLR-XLR) cable.

You can certainly use AES-EBU balanced cable as an analog interconnect, it has a characteristic impedance of 110 ohms but otherwise is similar to a 75 ohm coax as used for video and digital S/PDIF connections.

I personally haven't explored the effect different balanced cables have on sonics, but those who suggest it's a good option are well respected. I say try it and see how it works for you. It is very unlikely to "cause less fidelity"; balanced itself should be good for about -10dB better noise performance.

 

[sterling shoote]

Just a sidebar here, AES/EBU does not carry SCMS. making it possible to make digital copies of SCMS encoded material. Such recorders can be instructed however to produce SCMS tapes that can not be copied or from which copies cannot be copied when attempting to do so using S/PDIF or IEC 958 connections.