A Question of Balance

Many explanations of balanced lines are seriously muddled if not plain wrong.
Chris Woolf MIBS clarifies things in his own inimitable way.
f there is one grand distinction
between consumer and
professional in analogue audio it has
to be the balanced line. Without this
brilliant concept it would be hard to send
signals any distance by cable, low-noise
microphones would be rare beasts, and
we would spend all of our working life
trying to avoid hums and buzzes, instead
of just a part of it.
The balanced line does not lose its
relevance in the digital domain either
even if it changes its name to CATx and
it is almost inconceivable that any
recorded or transmitted signal has not
followed a path down some balanced
twin at some moment.
You would imagine that such a crucial
design element would be understood
perfectly by every professional user and
that all descriptions of how it works be
accurate but neither seems to be the
case.

How Do They Work?

So how are balanced lines usually
explained? A typical version is that the
source equipment (microphone, mixer,
or data hub) produces two symmetrical
outputs, one of which is in opposite
phase to the other, and that these are
connected to the two wires of a pair
cable. Any interference on the line will
produce identical in-phase signals on each
wire so if the receiving equipment then
inverts the signal phase on one terminal it
will see the original signal doubled and
the interference cancelled out. Is that
what Auntie told you at your alma maters
knee? And if so whats wrong with it?
First, we are all guilty of being sloppy
about the use of the word phase but in
this context what is meant is polarity (see
the figures throughout the following
text). Secondly and more importantly, it
is perfectly possible to have a balanced
output where the source doesnt actually

Building Bridges
The Wheatstone bridge is a fundamental
circuit in electronics. It is usually shown
diagrammatically as in figure 1. The red
signal source feeds both arms of the
bridge, and if all the resistors are
identical then the meter across the
centre will show nothing at all because
there is no potential difference between
the mid points. The same is true if the
yellow resistors are matched even if they
have a different value from the matched
blue pair.
Figure 2 shows the bridge stretched
out to include a length of twin cable in
the middle. The red signal source is
common-mode interference and is
cancelled out in the bridge if the arms
are in perfect balance. The green signal
source is the programme and the meter
senses its full potential difference the
differential signal is not cancelled out.
Note that common-mode impedances
of balanced lines are not the same thing
as the differential impedances, which are
most often specified.

Fig 1

Fig 2

20 LINE UP Sept/Oct 2006

produce opposite polarity signals, and for

an interconnect with two wires to have
induced interference that has far from
identical values on each leg. Furthermore,
the classic balanced input a simple twowinding transformer cant invert phase
at one terminal anyway! Which all goes
to suggest that this explanation is
distinctly unbalanced.

How They Really Work

The real magic of a balanced line is not its
ability to pass a decent signal any
electrical circuit can manage that but to
eradicate large amounts of interference,
so thats the part of the definition that we
ought to explore in more detail. The
crucial point is not that the interference
happens, by chance, to be about the same
on both legs of the line, but that a
balanced system is constructed to force
that condition as nearly as possible.

Bridges

Figure 3 This shows two sine waves, the

bottom one delayed so that it is 180
out of phase.

A balanced system is exactly that

too. It is useless considering two bits of
equipment and a length of twin cable
independently you have to connect
them all together before a balanced line
can exist, and to consider the
components as a complete system to see
if it is doing what you want it to do.
A great deal of interference originates
from magnetic or electric fields that are
capable of inducing voltages or currents
in your nice programme- or data-carrying
cable. However voltages exist between
two conductors and currents have to flow
around circuits, so there has to be
another part of the electrical path, a
nominal ground. Your programme cable
has an electrical relationship to this
ground an impedance which is largely
governed by the equipment at either end.
If the cable is unbalanced and has a single
core it clearly has just one impedance to
ground at each end. Equally obviously, if
it is twin cable it has two impedances at
each end. If these two impedances are
made exactly equal then the voltage (with
respect to ground) of any pair of points
on these cores will also be equal and
the current driven around the two
circuits made by each leg and ground will
also be exactly equal.
That, in a nutshell, is the definition.
A balanced line is a two-conductor
circuit in which both conductors
have the same impedance with respect
to ground and to all other conductors.
That is quoted from an IEC Standard
60268-3 informative annex. It doesnt
state that the signal lines have to be
driven symmetrically, nor that you have
to have phase inverting line receivers
indeed, the wording actually points out
that these are not involved.
That might surprise you. Balanced
lines are balanced without any regard for
signals inverted, symmetrical or
otherwise being present at all.

22 LINE UP Sept/Oct 2006

If you can almost remember back to your

school physics and Wheatstone bridges
you can have a fuller explanation of the
technique (see: Building Bridges, on
previous page). To clear up any worries
about the terminology, common-mode
signals are ones that are common to
(identical in) both wires of a pair;
differential signals are ones that are
different in each of them.
All balanced line inputs are sensitive
to the voltage difference across their two
(ungrounded) terminals thats true of
transformer and electronic versions and
they will ignore common-mode voltages
to a significant (but not unlimited) extent.
How well they ignore interference is
given by that arcane term, the Common
Mode Rejection Ratio (CMRR) and the
larger it is, the better. The limits depend
on the circuitry. Transformers are
inherently differential and dont need to
have any connection to ground. This
allows them to be floating and one set of
windings can have hundreds of volts
common-mode difference from the other
(a rather scary condition). Electronic
inputs use amplifiers, which necessarily
have a power connection a reference to
ground and this usually limits the range
of allowable common mode signals
considerably.
This isnt an occasion for deep circuit
analysis, but it is worth pointing out that,
with both transformers and electronic
inputs, it is possible for large commonmode interference signals to eat into the
headroom available for the desired
differential signals.

How Bad Can Things Get?

However good the rejection of a balanced
line input, it will be degraded to a greater
or lesser extent by the cable and the
output driver connected to it. The system
as a whole will always be less good at
getting rid of interference. Just how bad it
gets is governed by many things. The
balance of the bridge circuit depends on
the accuracy of matching impedances but
also on the overall ratio of one arm to the
other. Slight mismatches can be designed
to have a lesser effect if the common
mode impedance at one end is very low
and the other end is extremely high, but
with most conventional equipment even
a one Ohm impedance imbalance can
frequently give 15-20dB poorer rejection
of interference.
Now think about one Ohm and a
grotty piece of microphone cable plus
two grimy XLRs with oxidised pins or a

home-made pad that might be a balanced

one with 5% tolerance resistors but you
cant quite remember. The problem is
that these connections will function
perfectly well in differential terms you
will get the intended signal loud and clear
but in common-mode terms they will
have compromised a good system and
made it much more susceptible to
interference. What doesnt matter is
matched impedances in each leg of a
length of cable because this doesnt upset
the balance conditions at all.
When buying equipment you can
sometimes choose between transformers
and electronic inputs/outputs. The design
of the latter is whatever a manufacturer
chooses to put there, though the more
you pay for equipment the more likely
you are to get 1% tolerance resistors
instead of 5% ones, as well as more
sophisticated amplifier configurations.
Common-mode impedance has a
complex relationship with frequency and
thus different designs of circuit can have
very different values of CMRR for hum
and HF. Transformers usually retain their
rejection at high frequencies very well,
whereas that of op-amp based circuitry
with a lot of feedback tends to deteriorate
quite quickly. However there are
instrumentation-style inputs and other
ingenious circuit designs that can
overcome these problems.

Well-Driven?
Output transformers have their two
terminals connected to the balanced pair
and no ground connection but whether
the signal is present on both lines when
viewed with an oscilloscope depends on
the type of (balanced) input it is
connected to. Some electronic outputs

Figure 4 This shows the same sine

wave at the top while the bottom one
has the opposite polarity. The pictures
may look identical, but the marker
spot shows that there is a difference
phase is a time domain effect whereas
polarity is not.

Figure 5 The graphic above shows a

single half-cycle wave and its delayed
partner, which will always appear as a
double pulse (shown below)

push current into both lines

symmetrically but others drive only a
single leg of the balanced cable.
When intentionally driving
unbalanced lines you need to know the
output drivers configuration since this
dictates how you connect them, but it is
perfectly feasible for most electronic
outputs to drive one leg of a balanced
pair in an unbalanced mode
unintentionally too. All differential input
amplifiers must, by definition, be able to
accept balanced circuit signals but if one
leg is disconnected many will continue to
pass a signal in an unbalanced mode.
This ability of electronic interface
circuits to also operate unbalanced can
cause great confusion. On IBSnet, camera
monitoring returns are frequently
discussed and are a good example of this.
Some users report perfectly good results
and others hear appalling levels of buzz
and noise. The explanation is usually that
in one case the signal is being fed using
the cameras ground circuit as the return
(with all its TC chatter and digital
shash), while in the other an
interference-discriminating balanced
network is rejecting a good 40-50dB of
this. In some cases the problem arises
because the umbilical cable manufacturer
chose to use an unbalanced connection,
in others it is just that one wire has come
loose.

Balanced Cable
Even if the balance of the equipment at
either end is perfect, a cable can still pick
up interference unequally. Cables have a
capacitance between each leg and the

screen which depends on the thickness

of the core insulation. It is hard to get this
perfectly equal along the entire run so
long cables can have a few percent of
imbalance in their impedance to ground.
Another problem is that two cores cannot
be in the same place at the same moment
one will be nearer to a source of
interference than the other. Twisting
cores is the usual cure because they then
reverse their position regularly. A tighter
twist a shorter lay length gives better
cancelling resolution. Twin has the
problem of having a conductor pair crosssection like flat ribbon and is hard to lay
evenly within the screen. With four cores
there is a solid square section that is
much easier to work with. For this reason
quad cable can have a more consistent lay
and by pairing up opposite cores the
impedance imbalance to the screen can
also be approximately halved. It is this
improved accuracy of matching the levels
of induced interference that gives
starquad cable its reputation, often an
improvement of 40dB suppression of
induced interference over plain twisted
pair.
Bundling cores together within a
single screen is useful for stereo and
surround too since any interference
effects will be coherent across all signals
and therefore non-positional. For this
reason the use of quad cable as twocircuit pair to connect stereo
microphones is to be preferred to
running separate screened twins.

but not the signal cores. However, the

screen doesnt have any useful effect on
(electro)magnetic fields, of course, which
is a pity since these tend to be more
serious sources of interference. The
second function is to tie two pieces of
equipment together so that their
equipment ground potentials are not too
far apart. This is quite important with
electronic balanced amplifiers with their
limited common-mode ranges.
The first function only requires that
the screen is connected to ground at one
end, and gives rise to the One-End-Only
(OEO) arrangement. This argues that a
way to avoid ground loops is to prevent
any ground circuits being connected
together to form them. The questions to
ask, then, are which end to connect and
how to maintain the integrity of such a
system where all sorts of cable can be
plugged in? If the cable ground is only
Figure 6 This
shows the same
single half-cycle
wave and its
polarity-reversed
version which
sums to zero (as
shown below).

Why Have A Screen?

If balanced circuits dont involve the
screen why is it there, and what do you
do with it? There isnt a simple answer,
and there are no-screen, one-end-only and
both-end protocols. The cable cores have
a capacitance to the screen and that can
form a filter with the cable resistance.
That has the effect of causing some rolloff at high frequencies. For audio circuits
with a low driver impedance and only
moderate cable length it isnt important,
but for high-speed data circuits it is, so
many digital pair cables dispense with the
screen and rely purely on good commonmode rejection to give acceptable
interference levels. Long analogue
telephone circuits use the same trick.
Audio generally prefers to have
screens on cables and these serve two
purposes. The first is to provide a
structure akin to a Faraday cage around
the cores. This intercepts capacitively
connected electric fields, which can be
made to flow in the ground/shield circuit

connected at the receiving end the cable

capacitance mismatch will degrade
interference rejection: if it is connected
only at the driver end it wont. That looks
like a vote for Driver-End-Only, but it
isnt....
Screens connected at a single end are
called radio aerials. They are ideally
configured to pick up wireless signals,
often tuned as whip antennae by virtue of
their free length, and able to hurl great
quantities of RF into any circuit
connected to them. The common-mode
rejection of a balanced output may well
be very poor at such frequencies and will
convert it into a horrible differential
mode signal that the far-end balanced
input was never expecting to have to deal
with.

LINE UP Sept/Oct 2006

23

Both Ends Good

The preferred option now is to use
screens connected at both ends for
everything. The common-mode rejection
is sometimes compromised a little, but
there is less risk of RF contamination and
all cables can be identical.
An alternative could be real grounding
at one end and RF grounding with a
capacitor at the other, but this couldnt
work with phantom-powered
microphones a cable that cannot pass
on the ground reference wont supply
P48 (or even P12). Phantom powering is
a useful example of a common-mode
signal. Although it is DC it may have
small amounts of supply ripple or even
cross-talk from other microphones
imposed on it, but this doesnt matter
because the balanced nature of mic lines
can suppress this noise.
Cable screens should not be
connected to XLR shells but to Pin 1
alone and this is connected to the
equipment case directly inside the
equipment. Electrically the screens
should only meet the amplifier signal

24 LINE UP Sept/Oct 2006

grounds at one point and thus prevent

any interference currents flowing through
amplifier ground tracks. If the equipment
cases at each end of a balanced line have
significantly different safety ground
potentials a few hundred mA of ground
current can flow through the cable
screens. If this also flowed through even a
short length of loop track on an
amplifier PCB it could generate large
interference voltages the so-called
Pin 1 problem.
If the safety grounds are at such
different potentials that they cause
several amps to flow through cable
screens then you need to float equipment
and get a good electrician. Balanced
circuits with floating transformers can
produce exceptional common-mode
rejection with values of 80-100dB or even
more across the entire audio range, albeit
that they carry penalties of cost, weight
and poor LF performance. The more
sophisticated electronic circuits can
match that level of rejection but run-ofthe-mill ones tend to give the lower, but
still useful, figure of 40-50dB rejection.

If you think about the requirements

for the dynamic range equivalent to a
20 bit-plus digital signal (> 120dB) then
the need to make maximum use of a
balanced circuits ability to ignore
interference takes on a new perspective.
Of course, balanced circuits can even
take advantage of symmetrical signals and
the noise and headroom benefits these
can give but thats another story
entirely