Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Josh Lawrence <hardbop200@...>
Cc: linux-audio-user <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009 - 12:28 am

On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 04:55:48PM -0500, Josh Lawrence wrote:

For a stereo 6.5mm plug, the two insulated wires are to be soldered to
the tip and ring respectively, and the braid should be twisted together
and soldered to the sleeve.

Assuming the amplifier has two input channels for left and right ... the
polarity of those insulated wires depends on which speaker you want to
be the left one, and which you want to be the right one. The colour
coding used in the device might not match a standard, but you can check
by injecting a signal and listening to which speaker emits it. My
favourite signal for this is loop hum, using a finger.

For a mono 6.5mm plug, the two insulated wires should be soldered
together to the tip, and the brain twisted together and soldered to the
sleeve. This will deliver the mono audio signal to both inputs of the
amplifier.

It's odd that you say it is a "mono amp", but I guess you might mean a
monolithic amplifier module.

If you can put a photo up somewhere then I could confirm or refute your
suspicions about it. ;-)

> PS - I've read that the proper way to do this is to use an audio

There are many transformers that will work for this, but the best is one
that has a 1:1 winding ratio, assuming you are using signals of
comparable electrical amplitudes. It's not an audiophile thing, but
rather a way to prevent hum caused by loops.

You might not need this, especially for practice amps.

--
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Josh Lawrence, (Tue Sep 8, 9:55 pm)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, James Cameron, (Wed Sep 9, 12:28 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Josh Lawrence, (Wed Sep 9, 3:16 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Ricardus Vincente, (Tue Sep 8, 10:03 pm)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Josh Lawrence, (Tue Sep 8, 11:25 pm)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, sevol, (Wed Sep 9, 12:16 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, James Cameron, (Wed Sep 9, 12:49 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, sevol, (Wed Sep 9, 4:25 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, James Cameron, (Wed Sep 9, 4:48 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, sevol, (Wed Sep 9, 8:43 pm)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, david, (Fri Sep 11, 6:00 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Ricardus Vincente, (Wed Sep 9, 1:07 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, James Cameron, (Wed Sep 9, 1:14 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Leo, (Wed Sep 9, 12:27 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, sevol, (Wed Sep 9, 4:30 am)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Leo, (Tue Sep 8, 11:48 pm)
Re: [LAU] OT: unbalanced to balanced, Gabriel M. Beddingfield, (Tue Sep 8, 11:58 pm)