Balancing output of a consumer EQ

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
ruffrecords said:
Bottom line the simplest solution not to lose 6dB is to add a transformer to the EQ input.

I agree.  No need to overcomplicate things.  Edcor is one choice for decent inexpensive transformers.
 
moamps said:
You described it in your reply 33.
What's exactly "Tascam problem"?This schematic is part of a Rane product, I used it only to illustrate how it was done in principle in UA2192.
I suppose it does imply that's what's happening but it might be a bit of a leap to assume it's like that Rane circuit. The "Tascam problem" is when a circuit like that Rane one is used and the cold output is grounded at the receiving end such that the op amp is driving a 100 ohm load and it causes enough supply stress on the chip that the other op amp (driving the + output) exhibits some distortion. But there could be something about the UA circuit that avoids the distortion and then it's not really a "problem". For example, if the supply has enough headroom, there could be another buildout resistor inside the feedback loop and thus maintain the same output level but limit current in the event the output is shorted. Or it's using some other kind of current limiting arrangement.

That is a weird piece of gear though. It's a high-end converter that uses the old crappy Urei construction? It sounds like the marketing department did a focus group while the engineers were out to lunch.
 
squarewave said:
I suppose it does imply that's what's happening but it might be a bit of a leap to assume it's like that Rane circuit. The "Tascam problem" is when a circuit like that Rane one is used and the cold output is grounded at the receiving end such that the op amp is driving a 100 ohm load and it causes enough supply stress on the chip that the other op amp (driving the + output) exhibits some distortion. But there could be something about the UA circuit that avoids the distortion and then it's not really a "problem". For example, if the supply has enough headroom, there could be another buildout resistor inside the feedback loop and thus maintain the same output level but limit current in the event the output is shorted. Or it's using some other kind of current limiting arrangement.

That is a weird piece of gear though. It's a high-end converter that uses the old crappy Urei construction? It sounds like the marketing department did a focus group while the engineers were out to lunch.
It is bad practice to drive an active output short circuit into ground. Besides the obvious stress to the ic (which is why less than professional gear often have high output impedances).

That current will find it's way back to the PS, if lucky it will only cause a little extra crosstalk.  ::)

JR 
 
JohnRoberts said:
It is bad practice to drive an active output short circuit into ground. Besides the obvious stress to the ic (which is why less than professional gear often have high output impedances).

That current will find it's way back to the PS, if lucky it will only cause a little extra crosstalk.  ::)

Indeed. Damage Limitation. I've trained myself not to be surprised when an FX pedal etc states an output impedance of, say , 1K0.
Possibly because a TR or TRS jack will be at least momentarily shorted to 'Ground' when plugging / unplugging...
 
moamps said:
EQ circuitry can be overloaded that way. IMO, better solution is using an unbal/bal output driver.
I don't see how adding a THAT 1240at the input of an unbalanced circuit can overload it, and how balancing the output of said unbalanced circuit could help it. significantly driving a balanced input.
The issue that seems to be recognised is that the converter has an output scheme with non-floating legs, which prevents using the full differenetial voltage for driving the subsequent gear, hence the 6dB loss. OTOH, the unbalanced output has no loss when driving a balanced or differential input.
I hope we're all talking about the same...
 
abbey road d enfer said:
I don't see how adding a THAT 1240at the input of an unbalanced circuit can overload it, and how balancing the output of said unbalanced circuit could help it. significantly driving a balanced input.....I hope we're all talking about the same...

Nominal input level of consumer gear is smaller than in pro (in range -10 to 0dBu) so if you rise input level at the input of it for 6dB to +4dBu  as nominal, the headroom of the EQ decreases. If you place balanced driver to the output, this will not happen.
 
I also interpreted it as prefering the approach of step down input with step up output like 1246 / 1646  combo as you gain 6 dB internal headroom. As opposed to 1240 with unity gain output.
 
moamps said:
EQ circuitry can be overloaded that way. IMO, better solution is using an unbal/bal output driver.
The schematic  for this device show a power rail of over 40V so I expect overload will be unlikely.

Cheers

Ian
 
FWIW, the EQ in question hasn't been overloaded by any of the signal that I've sent through it.  Also,  I have 10 other channels of pretty good lineage,most of it built from projects that originated on this forum, and this device sounds as good or better than several of these units when boosting, even at extreme settings.

I have a couple of Edcor 10K:10K on order, so I'll be reporting back with how that approach works soon.
 
I agree with abbey, an electronic balanced solution is best in most cases, but considering that this EQ is far from hi-end, a cheapy trafo like an Edcore is the easiest solution, I wouldn't use anything much better than that since the price of a good transformer is probably more than the price of the EQ itself. Only problem with Edcor trannies is the long lead times, and during COVID times they may be even longer... Any transformer is more expensive than the 1246/1646 solution.
 
abbey road d enfer said:
Maybe not...  ;)
https://www.amazon.com/PAC-SNI-1-Noise-Isolator/dp/B000K50HJE/ref=sr_1_14?dchild=1&keywords=hum+killer&qid=1597906845&sr=8-14

I stand corrected, what about 2 for $0.41 USD ? https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000456180096.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.58fa4c4dlNBBa2

I've used tons of those to kill hum in conference rooms with small PA's, laptop A/V connections, projectors, etc... Don't even bother measuring THD or freq. response, its better not to know.....
 
user 37518 said:
I stand corrected, what about 2 for $0.41 USD ? https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000456180096.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.58fa4c4dlNBBa2

I've used tons of those to kill hum in conference rooms with small PA's, laptop A/V connections, projectors, etc... Don't even bother measuring THD or freq. response, its better not to know.....
With 0.29H inductance and 135r DCR, they are not really adequate for inputs, just barely acceptable for outputs, provided the stage that drives them has enough oomph and the load is not too hard. It's thetype of fix that should never be left permanent IMO.
 
ruffrecords said:
I agree. I do not know why I thought it was impedance balanced.

Well tbh it's so easy to mix up the terminology around this topic - balanced / impedance balanced / differential / floating / ground cancelling etc etc - schematics much more use  :) Cheers.
 
Today I got some of those cheap Chinese 1:1 600:600 transformers in the mail. All I can say is: they looked bigger in the pictures. Just for fun I'll measure the Inductance, THD and Freq. Response. They sure look like +27dBu line output transformers, huh?

Thumb.png


 
volker said:
That's the EI14 sized one right? The number gives the long side of the lamination in millimeters.

I missed that one!, Are these usable in any way or are they just saturation machines? CJ? I've used a mixed feedback driver to lower the distortion on output trannies and the "Zero Field" technique to lower distortion in small input trannies, however they were at least OEPs nothing like these cheap things.

I've used slightly bigger chinese ones for conference rooms, actually one of those conference rooms used to belong to one of the 3 big record labels, i'll let you guess which one, they had huge hum noises in their PA system which they used to listen to their artists new albums, they also had a virtual conference system and hum was a problem everytime they connected a laptop to the projector and audio at the same time, I ended up using tons of cheap Chinese trafos, try explaining to a label executive that they need to spend 2K on Jensen transformers, they did not find that offer attractive so I ended up using the cheapest thing I could find, even Edcore was out of the question .

Some label manager listened to his artist's new album in the PA after I fixed it and told the A&R that it was one of the best sounding PA conference room systems he ever heard, so the transformers can't be that bad, to be fair I also measured the room, repositioned and EQ'ed the system, however the trafos were at least 3-4 times bigger than these EI14. That was 8 years ago, time flies
 

Latest posts

Back
Top