or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › New to Commercial Audio
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New to Commercial Audio

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
Hi All. So Ive been doing System Integration for almost a decade but havent done much Commercial Sound. Actually none, minus some programming. Im doing a bar for some friends, pretty big space. I was looking to give them a simple stereo receiver - Denon, Onkyo or Marantz most likely. I was going to preamp that to some Crown XLR amps to push the speakers - Most likely JBL. My question is basically am I wiring this correctly? Preamp out both channels to the first Crown RCA Inputs. Then 1/4 out to the next RCA input on the next crown and so on. And then just use the speakers level outs. Would this be correct? If not, Any thoughts? Thanks.
post #2 of 24
The crown amps I have bought lately don't even have RCA inputs. They have XLR inputs. Actually, they have XLR inputs and outputs so you can daisy chain a bunch of them together, driving them all from the same source.

If I had a bunch of them to connect together I'd obtain or build a RCA -> XLR adaptor cable, and then daisy chain the subsequent amp off the first with XLR cables.

I'd build the RCA -> XLR cable in accordance with Rane note 110 http://www.rane.com/note110.html
post #3 of 24
Balanced (XLR) connections are the only thing used in studios and recording venues. They can be run 100 feet or more with no signal loss or noise concerns.

Unbalanced (RCA) connections are are a 3rd rate leftover that should have been phased out of ALL audio years ago. From a technical and practical standpoint, unbalanced connections suck.
post #4 of 24
If the OP is looking at the XLS Drivecore they have RCA...
post #5 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

Balanced (XLR) connections are the only thing used in studios and recording venues. They can be run 100 feet or more with no signal loss or noise concerns.
Unbalanced (RCA) connections are are a 3rd rate leftover that should have been phased out of ALL audio years ago. From a technical and practical standpoint, unbalanced connections suck.

The actual history of the RCA jack is that it was invented by RCA to internally connect 45 rpm turntables to radios. There was no intent that consumers ever even see them, let alone touch them.
post #6 of 24
Quote:
From a technical and practical standpoint, unbalanced connections suck.

Then, why are they used to carry cable tv signals for miles? Or 3G HD-SDI signals for thousands of feet?
post #7 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

Quote:
From a technical and practical standpoint, unbalanced connections suck.
Then, why are they used to carry cable tv signals for miles? Or 3G HD-SDI signals for thousands of feet?

The context of my comment was an audio forum. Your question involves video and RF which are completely different contexts.
post #8 of 24
Quote:
The context of my comment was an audio forum.

I wasn't responding to, nor did I quote, your comment.
Quote:
Your question involves video and RF which are completely different contexts.

No, not really. For example, video signals extend from DC to GHz, they just have a higer frequency response then audio signals. They're still unbalanced interconnects.
post #9 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

Quote:
The context of my comment was an audio forum.
I wasn't responding to, nor did I quote, your comment.

Doesn't matter - it is still true that the comment you quoted appears on this thread. In the context of this thread, discussion of RF is off topic.

I quoted with and agreed with the comment you are taking exception to, so I have direct standing in the discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam64 
Quote:
Your question involves video and RF which are completely different contexts.

No, not really. For example, video signals extend from DC to GHz, they just have a higer frequency response then audio signals. They're still unbalanced interconnects.

Again, you're off topic because your video signal mention was in the context of 3G wireless and cable TV, both of which relate to RF signals in the VHF or UHF ranges.
post #10 of 24
Quote:
In the context of this thread, discussion of RF is off topic.

But the discussion of video is not.
Quote:
I quoted with and agreed with the comment you are taking exception to, so I have direct standing in the discussion.

Doesn't matter, your but one opinion...doesn't make it correct.
Quote:
Again, you're off topic because your video signal mention was in the context of 3G wireless and cable TV,

No, I'm not off topic at all. You are off topic because you're not familiar with what 3G-HD SDI is, I never mentioned 3G wireless...that was you.
perhaps you need to google some of these terms, before revealing your lack of knowledge on the subject.
Quote:
both of which relate to RF signals in the VHF or UHF ranges.

Please stop, I'm embarrassed for you.
post #11 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

Quote:
In the context of this thread, discussion of RF is off topic.
But the discussion of video is not.
Quote:
I quoted with and agreed with the comment you are taking exception to, so I have direct standing in the discussion.
Doesn't matter, your but one opinion...doesn't make it correct.

Doesn't make it incorrect either. But unlike you, I'm trying desperately to stay on topic.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam64 
Again, you're off topic because your video signal mention was in the context of 3G wireless and cable TV,
No, I'm not off topic at all.

Really? As far off as you are, next thing you'll do is try to prove your complaints about my comment about unbalanced analog lines with a digital signal.
Quote:
You are off topic because you're not familiar with what 3G-HD SDI is,

You're right. So I looked it up. 3G-HD SDI is... is... it is digital video signal. Oh, My, Goodness! You are actually trying to prove my comment about an analog audio signal wrong using as your primary example, a digital video signal!

Talk about being embarrassed about your posts! How off-topic can you get - next thing you'll be talking about garden hoses! ;-)
post #12 of 24
Quote:
I'm trying desperately to stay on topic.

really? try harder
Quote:
As far off as you are, next thing you'll do is try to prove your complaints about my comment about unbalanced analog lines with a digital signal.

I'm not 'far off' arny, you are...sorry, I guess this is way oiver your head. You're trying to tell me there is a difference between a voltage across a conductor that represents a a digital signal vs. a voltage across a conductor that represents an analog signal? This is covered in E101...have you ever taken a course or even read an electronics textbook?
Quote:
Talk about being embarrassed about your posts!

poor arny, when backed into a corner you come out fighting. Of course you're wrong again, but that's never stopped you from posting.

arny, take an introduction to digital electronics course, you have a lot to learn.
post #13 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

You're trying to tell me there is a difference between a voltage across a conductor that represents a a digital signal vs. a voltage across a conductor that represents an analog signal?

There is no difference in the voltage itself, but there is a giant difference in its effect on sound quality. An analog cable's effect on the audio signal can be like an equalizer. In fact equalization was invented to deal with that problem. In contrast, a digital signal either provides the potential for full frequency response and dynamic range, or it is effectively broken.

Are you one of the sad, ignorant people who "hears" differences in timbre between SP/DIF cables? ;-)

However, the current standard for digital connections is also balanced. True even when the signal only has to go a few feet. Do you even have a clue about how HDMI works? What does the D in TMDS stand for?
Quote:
This is covered in E101...have you ever taken a course or even read an electronics textbook?

I knew that much about electronics long before I went to college. I've been building electronics projects since 1954.

If you want to compare formal credentials, lets hear about yours. ;-)

Digital electronics? I have been installing and repairing computers (in those days at the gate level) since 1964. My employer? IBM.

Given that you apparently think that HDMI is unbalanced... LOL!
post #14 of 24
Quote:
Are you one of the sad, ignorant people who "hears" differences in timbre between SP/DIF cables? ;-)

No arny, I'm not sad and ignorant. Unlike you, I understand digital communications. You're little diatribe above is just more of your useless deflection. You haven't answered me, you haven't even come close to addressing what I said...admit it, it's way over your ignorant little head.
Quote:
In fact equalization was invented to deal with that problem.

Please cite your sources of this 'fact'.
Quote:
However, the current standard for digital connections is also balanced.

HD SDI is a digital standard, it's not balanced.
AES is a digital standard, it's preferred use is over coax, since it can travel much further over coax then twisted pair....you'd know this if you actually had any experience. with it....but, once again, you simply reveal your ignorance.
Quote:
Do you even have a clue about how HDMI works? What does the D in TMDS stand for?

Differential, do you know what the other letters mean? Does this have anything to do with the topic, or is it more of your pathetic deflection?
Quote:
I knew that much about electronics long before I went to college.

I don't beleive you went to school at all, your level of knowledge is that of a hobbyist, at best.
Quote:
If you want to compare formal credentials, lets hear about yours. ;-)

You know as well as I do that internet credentials are about as useful as your posts.
Quote:
Given that you apparently think that HDMI is unbalanced... LOL!

How pathetic of you....you can't debate like an adult, so you put words in my mouth to argue against?
You're a sad little man, arny.
post #15 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

Quote:
Are you one of the sad, ignorant people who "hears" differences in timbre between SP/DIF cables? ;-)
No arny, I'm not sad and ignorant. Unlike you, I understand digital communications.

Really? Please tell us about the operational digital communication systems that you've designed and installed in the past month for hire... ;-)
Quote:
You're (sic) little diatribe above is just more of your useless deflection. You haven't answered me, you haven't even come close to addressing what I said...admit it, it's way over your ignorant little head.

What didn't I answer?
Quote:
Quote:
In fact equalization was invented to deal with that problem.
Please cite your sources of this 'fact'.

The annals of the Bell system ca. 1925-1960.

Given that your postings' purpose seems to be to falsely stoke your ego, I'm not particularly interested in teaching you how to do technical research. ;-) here is a hint: Google is your friend.
Quote:
Quote:
However, the current standard for digital connections is also balanced.
HD SDI is a digital standard, it's not balanced.

Obviously, it was designed to work with existing cabling infrastructure. It's a cost-effective evolution of SDI.
Quote:
AES is a digital standard, it's preferred use is over coax, since it can travel much further over coax then twisted pair....you'd know this if you actually had any experience.

Which of the several relevant AES standards are you referring to? By implying that there is just one, you are exposing your lack of understanding of the subject. Also, the AES is far from being the be-all and end-all in this area.

But that all said, I'll invoke the same explanation - it was done to exploit existing infrastructure.
Quote:
Quote:
Do you even have a clue about how HDMI works? What does the D in TMDS stand for?
Differential, do you know what the other letters mean? Does this have anything to do with the topic, or is it more of your pathetic deflection?

Is a differential system balanced or unbalanced?
Quote:
Quote:
I knew that much about electronics long before I went to college.
I don't beleive (sic) you went to school at all, your level of knowledge is that of a hobbyist, at best.

You've sloughed the question once, which suggests that it is a weak spot for you.

What are your credentials for making these far-reaching and somewhat libelous claims?

The last guy to play this game came out a big loser. ;-)

BTW, this is also joke on you because there are people here who have out-of-band knowledge of my CV. You obviously don't. They are laughing at you behind your back. It matters to you. ;-)
post #16 of 24
guys enough fighting. What is the point of this I know more then you debate? just please stop attacking each other okay.
post #17 of 24
And in the end, for short cable runs, there is nothing wrong with unbalanced RCA connections, IMO.. The reason why balanced XLR connections were used in broadcast, recording studios and live performance applications is because of long cable runs between studio and control rooms or between performer and mixing desk and because most rooms had patch bays.

Considering that outside of vinyl music freaks (<2% of the market) and OPPO 95 users, no one is running much analog audio anymore, I'd say it's a moot point.

And just referring to its physical characteristics and not its capabilities or purpose, I'd take an RCA plug over an HDMI plug any day. At least RCA plugs stay in (okay, XLR plugs stay in ever better) whereas my HDMI cables are always falling out. It's criminal that they were designed without some kind of locking mechanism or simply a better "squeeze", like a USB cable. Balanced XLRs do have the advantage of having the capability to phantom power microphones. One disadvantage of XLRs is that different microphone manufacturers wired them differently, either according to the IEC standard with contact 2 hot or according to the American standard with contact 3 hot. When I was a recording engineer, those following the IEC Standard included Amek, Alice, Canary, HH Electronics, Turner, Yamaha, Electrovoice, Sennheiser, AKG, Roland and Shure. Those following the American standard included RSD, Allen & Heath, Midas, Soundcraft, Klark Teknik, EV Tapco, Audio and Design Recording and MXR Innovations. Hmm...Neumann is missing from that list, but I bet they follow the IEC standard.

Don't know if anything has changed in the intervening years.
post #18 of 24
Quote:
I'd take an RCA plug over an HDMI plug any day.

that's like comparing a refridgerator to a lawnmower.
Quote:
The reason why balanced XLR connections were used in broadcast, recording studios and live performance applications is because of long cable runs between studio and control rooms or between performer and mixing desk and because most rooms had patch bays.

Actually, the phone company started using balanced lines, and has been ever since....long before broadcasting was invented.
post #19 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

that's like comparing a refridgerator to a lawnmower.
Actually, the phone company started using balanced lines, and has been ever since....long before broadcasting was invented.

The major advantages of balanced interfaces (this includes both the circuitry and the cable) is:

(1) The input stage on the equipment receiving the signal is a differential amplifier that rejects common mode interference. An unbalanced input can't separate the common mode interference from the signal. The balanced input can.

(2) When both sides of the balanced interface are properly driven from an active source, the effective signal at the input to the receiving side sees twice the voltage. This attenuates differential mode interference by 6 dB. The achievable noise floor is improved by 3 dB.

These advantages exist no matter how long or how short the interconnecting cable is.
post #20 of 24
Why did you quote me?

Those are wll known facts, no one is diputing them.
post #21 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

Why did you quote me?
Those are wll known facts, no one is diputing them.

It didn't read that way to me with all of the discussion of long lines and telephone lines.

Take it as hearty agreement, then.
post #22 of 24
Quote:
It didn't read that way to me with all of the discussion of long lines and telephone lines.

What thread are you reading?
post #23 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAM64 View Post

What thread are you reading?

The one with posts 17 and 18 in it!

I could take this as proof that you don't read your own posts. I feel your pain...
post #24 of 24
Still struggling with your reading comprehension problem, arny?
Quote:
I feel your pain...

And I yours.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 2 Channel Audio
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › New to Commercial Audio