I've found the values to be stable. My multimeter test leads however were not until I discovered a loose banana connector.
Despite some flexing of the cable too from what I remember.
By all means go ahead and use RG58-RG59 along with a BNC connector. It would make a very nice cable and look good too with some heatshrink on each end.
I agree that the rigidity of the copper makes the cable sometimes difficult to route but there is no magic rule book saying you have to use rigid copper strand. I find that it gives me peace of mind too in knowing that I've done the best for my low voltage signal in addition to making a decent cable which has replaced my discount bin RCA cables for very cheap.
We are replacing RCA and random-wire here, not XLR.
Its important to remember though to use the right BNC connector for the right coax. to prevent reflections and jitter from hell. 75 ohm coax (RG59) should go with 75 ohm BNC connectors. and RG58 should go with 50 ohm BNC connectors.
It should also be noted that crimping tools for coax are available from almost any Hardware store. So there is that going for BNC and Coax too.
Last edited:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...tal-coax-cable-regular-2-ch-analog-audio.html
There is also this threads replies to consider.
Hi and thanks a lot for the valuable suggestion and sorry
But this 3D did not show up when i posted
Anyway i think i have all the info i need here under
Thanks a lot for the very valuable advice.
I was considering that the task of transmitting a minute signal from a probe to a scope had to be very much more demanding that to carry a more "robust" signal from a cd player to a preamp for instance
I was clearly wrong. As usual.
Sticking with RCAs a good approach could be to replace them with something better quality. There is a big difference from the average rcas and the good ones.
Better to go for something durable.
Just one last question, from the other 3d mentioned, i read
would you agree with this statement, very important i would say ?
solid core cables give really a cleaner sound ?
Thanks again and kind regards, gino
I have largely remained with RCA single-ended connectors, because they are the most popular types found on consumer audio and video products for audio signal transmission. When I design a piece, I like it to be compatible with others for listening and user comparisons. I can understand that may not be among some DIYer's build criteria. I have had problems with older gear that was given to me for servicing, where the tarnished single ended connections were not completing the circuit properly. This does have an effect on transfer magnitude and amplitude. However, with modern and not nessecarily expensive gold-plated male and female RCA connectors and a cleaning of older types, there have been no issues. I found that they conduct well and sound pure. The important point that I give people is to use gold plated over the bargain bin nickel types, for a good connection every time that doesn't go bad.
Last edited:
Hi and thanks a lot for the very valuable advice
Honestly i thought that the BNC friends were more ... many more
I have been influenced by seeing all those BNCs on a scope ... an object of cult for me
Thanks again
Kind regards, gino
OK: (I'm repeating myself, but)
a] The RG6-QS(Quad Shield) coax that we see in North America, the kind that we can buy in big-box stores and see in the back of cable TV installers truck, is optimized for the very high frequency cable TV channels. It's a very poor choice for longer RCA analog interconnects.
b] The 50 Ohm or 75 Ohm business only applies to radio frequency cables, it has nothing to do with reasonable analog audio cables. With BNC connectors, what really matters is that the connector matches the diameter of your cable.
c] The reason for choosing a coax cable cable with a heavy braided shield/return, is not about the audio signal it's self. The issue is the Leakage Current Effect (Common Impedance Coupling) noise. A heavy coax can have maybe 25dB less of this noise than a ordinary RG6-QS.
a] The RG6-QS(Quad Shield) coax that we see in North America, the kind that we can buy in big-box stores and see in the back of cable TV installers truck, is optimized for the very high frequency cable TV channels. It's a very poor choice for longer RCA analog interconnects.
b] The 50 Ohm or 75 Ohm business only applies to radio frequency cables, it has nothing to do with reasonable analog audio cables. With BNC connectors, what really matters is that the connector matches the diameter of your cable.
c] The reason for choosing a coax cable cable with a heavy braided shield/return, is not about the audio signal it's self. The issue is the Leakage Current Effect (Common Impedance Coupling) noise. A heavy coax can have maybe 25dB less of this noise than a ordinary RG6-QS.
75 Ohm BNC connectors are my favorite choice for digital interconnects as they are eh..75 Ohm just like the other parts specified for SPDIF use like SPDIF signal transformers. It really is a good connector for that purpose. Better than RCA anyway. The fact that they can't be plugged in analog RCA in- and outputs only makes matters more handy 
Never understood why the industry choose the same plugs and jacks for totally different purposes. You will need a crimping tool however and also the right cable must be chosen to be crimped with the right connector (various different sizes can be found) i.e. it is all more work than buying audiophile chinese produced contract work RCA stuff. An advantage is that 75 Ohm shielded industrial cable simply is well proven technology as the cable is being used in professional and commercial HF environments so generally it is well shielded or at least it has a specification sheet with real measured numbers. You never know what you buy if you buy commercial grade RCA cables, whatever their price is. It would have been a better design if they had thought about standard impedances when they started using RCA for audio. The old DIN plugs had those parameters. It would make life simpler if for instance 600 Ohm was chosen as standard interface for analog signal as many signal transformers for studio use are 600 Ohm. The lower impedance the better but the harder to drive and unsatisifed tube guys as a result .
Anyway it surprises me to see many chinese Ebay DACs using 75 Ohm BNC nowadays. I can't complain.
The stories about bad BNC connectors often come from 50 Ohm and 75 Ohm connectors being used with their wrong counterparts. Some manufacturers choose to give their 50 ohm connectors thicker pins which ruins 75 Ohm female connectors. Not all do however so the BNC standards are flawed like many standards are...Why on earth can't one see the difference between the 50 and 75 Ohm BNC ?
Never understood why the industry choose the same plugs and jacks for totally different purposes. You will need a crimping tool however and also the right cable must be chosen to be crimped with the right connector (various different sizes can be found) i.e. it is all more work than buying audiophile chinese produced contract work RCA stuff. An advantage is that 75 Ohm shielded industrial cable simply is well proven technology as the cable is being used in professional and commercial HF environments so generally it is well shielded or at least it has a specification sheet with real measured numbers. You never know what you buy if you buy commercial grade RCA cables, whatever their price is. It would have been a better design if they had thought about standard impedances when they started using RCA for audio. The old DIN plugs had those parameters. It would make life simpler if for instance 600 Ohm was chosen as standard interface for analog signal as many signal transformers for studio use are 600 Ohm. The lower impedance the better but the harder to drive and unsatisifed tube guys as a result . Anyway it surprises me to see many chinese Ebay DACs using 75 Ohm BNC nowadays. I can't complain.
The stories about bad BNC connectors often come from 50 Ohm and 75 Ohm connectors being used with their wrong counterparts. Some manufacturers choose to give their 50 ohm connectors thicker pins which ruins 75 Ohm female connectors. Not all do however so the BNC standards are flawed like many standards are...Why on earth can't one see the difference between the 50 and 75 Ohm BNC ?
Last edited:
It is not but it was something of the past that keeps living on. It does not exist anymore with the recent plugs and jacks. Just check some old and recent datasheets. I want to remark that it was/is the 50 Ohm version having a thicker pin, not the 75 Ohm version AFAIK. It is nice that many manufacturers meanwhile seem to realize that it is not practical so their 50 and 75 Ohm BNC connectors have the same pin diameter (Racall, Tyco, Amphenol etc.). DIYers might use older 50 and 75 Ohm plugs so some caution is not wrong.
An important difference that might come handy (my only way of seeing any difference at all): the 75 Ohm version has either a very thin Teflon collar around the pin or no Teflon collar at all, so the pin is "floating", while the 50 Ohm version has around 2 mm or thicker Delrin around it. I just verified my rusty info and it seems 50 Ohm has indeed Delrin instead of Teflon:
http://www.milestek.com/blog/index.php/2011/04/50-ohm-vs-75-ohm-bnc-connectors-explained/
Check this sentence "Mechanically mates with common 50 ohm BNC " to debunk the urban legend somewhat.
http://www.canare.com/ProductItemDisplay.aspx?productItemID=31
Here you have it, an interesting read and facts about the pin diameter for a change. As a European I politely frown at the standard pin diameter of 053" (please let the world be metrical):
http://www.te.com/content/dam/te/gl...or-high-bandwidth-bnc-connectors-106088ae.pdf
There are various different quality versions of BNC stuff but when you choose an A brand they are mostly well designed for a long service life. One of the key parameters amongst their bandwidth is how many times they can be "mated" which is better with the professional/MIL versions. Many manufacturers distinguish between commercial (low mating number) and professional/MIL versions by engraving the commercial version with stripes (lll) and the others with "crosses" (XXX).
An important difference that might come handy (my only way of seeing any difference at all): the 75 Ohm version has either a very thin Teflon collar around the pin or no Teflon collar at all, so the pin is "floating", while the 50 Ohm version has around 2 mm or thicker Delrin around it. I just verified my rusty info and it seems 50 Ohm has indeed Delrin instead of Teflon:
http://www.milestek.com/blog/index.php/2011/04/50-ohm-vs-75-ohm-bnc-connectors-explained/
Check this sentence "Mechanically mates with common 50 ohm BNC " to debunk the urban legend somewhat.
http://www.canare.com/ProductItemDisplay.aspx?productItemID=31
Here you have it, an interesting read and facts about the pin diameter for a change. As a European I politely frown at the standard pin diameter of 053" (please let the world be metrical):
http://www.te.com/content/dam/te/gl...or-high-bandwidth-bnc-connectors-106088ae.pdf
There are various different quality versions of BNC stuff but when you choose an A brand they are mostly well designed for a long service life. One of the key parameters amongst their bandwidth is how many times they can be "mated" which is better with the professional/MIL versions. Many manufacturers distinguish between commercial (low mating number) and professional/MIL versions by engraving the commercial version with stripes (lll) and the others with "crosses" (XXX).
Last edited:
FWIW - 75 ohms BNC is a bit of a uggly duckling, because of the strange spec of being mechanically interchangable with its 50 ohm brother..... thus the 75 ohm has a lower frequency rating than the 50 ohm version. For analog audio this really does not matter at all, but feinschmeckers in SPDIF or similar digital should not mix'em up
During my close to 40 yrs in bussiness, I've literally used thousands of BNCs, and very rarely found failures except when abused or because of sloppy workmanship. I guess the RCA really has it's origin as the very cheap and flimsy early ones, and when e.g. older BNCs were rather fiddly with their solder / screw combination.
In my opinion, BNCs and good quality coax makes an excellent audio connection, if you have the tools and mindset to do it all your own, but what do I know??? I'm probably just an old geezer with too much education who's been in the business for way too long...
For those so inclined, CAMAC connectors were used by I-don't-remember-who-in-HiEnd, and the LEMO coaxials are really excellent !
During my close to 40 yrs in bussiness, I've literally used thousands of BNCs, and very rarely found failures except when abused or because of sloppy workmanship. I guess the RCA really has it's origin as the very cheap and flimsy early ones, and when e.g. older BNCs were rather fiddly with their solder / screw combination.
In my opinion, BNCs and good quality coax makes an excellent audio connection, if you have the tools and mindset to do it all your own, but what do I know??? I'm probably just an old geezer with too much education who's been in the business for way too long...
For those so inclined, CAMAC connectors were used by I-don't-remember-who-in-HiEnd, and the LEMO coaxials are really excellent !
I really love the word "feinschmeckers"
The Lemo connectors are like swiss watches: excellent. Still they are far away from BNC in terms of interchangeability. If you go Lemo there is not way back and no bringing your gear to friends...
I have a box full of Lemo connectors and they are superior (technical, feel, look) but I can't get myself to use them for mentioned reasons. Camac was used by Levinson. I recall the audiophiles defending the use of this
quite non standard and also expensive audio connectors being the reason why Levinson stuff sounded better ...
The Lemo connectors are like swiss watches: excellent. Still they are far away from BNC in terms of interchangeability. If you go Lemo there is not way back and no bringing your gear to friends...
I have a box full of Lemo connectors and they are superior (technical, feel, look) but I can't get myself to use them for mentioned reasons. Camac was used by Levinson. I recall the audiophiles defending the use of this
quite non standard and also expensive audio connectors being the reason why Levinson stuff sounded better ...
Last edited:
Levinson - yes.... just could not remember....... brainfart ??
Over the years, I've used some Lemos for special purposes.... really excellent connectors, but at a price..... and the larger multipins are a real PITA to work with.....
( and I think I still have large panel with CAMACs stashed away somewhere.... )
EDIT: as for using odd ends, a handfull of adapters to RCA might be handy....
Over the years, I've used some Lemos for special purposes.... really excellent connectors, but at a price..... and the larger multipins are a real PITA to work with.....
( and I think I still have large panel with CAMACs stashed away somewhere.... )
EDIT: as for using odd ends, a handfull of adapters to RCA might be handy....
Last edited:
A quite secret Norwegian gang of people liking goats wearing glasses. I can not provide more inside info unless you want to join the gang. Wearing glasses (not mandatory, we are tolerant), a good taste for music, audio gear, nice food and good beers and wines are a plus to join. AFAIK I am the only non-Norwegian member. A proud member too !
Den Brillegeit gruppen står for troskap til sann glede
Den Brillegeit gruppen står for troskap til sann glede
Attachments
Last edited:
I'm not much interested in compatibility with other people's stuff, so for everything other than my power amps, I'm using REAN tinyXLR. Much easier to work with than most other connectors, the same general size as RCA, and first-rate contacts. The three pin versions are perfect for running balanced.
No audiophile snob appeal, they just work.
No audiophile snob appeal, they just work.
gino, my philosophy is that all connectors are bad, and need to be eliminated - the gain has always been much superior sound, the loss is lack of flexibility; and the latter can be lived with, ! I did some experiments decades ago, over a number of months, which convinced me there was no obvious, simple way to get around this - every normal audio system I listen to has at least some of the distortion 'smell' that non-optimum connections give - it's the easiest way to degrade convincing sound back down to conventional hifi, !
Hard wiring, or equivalent, is the only way out - the greater the potential of the system, the worse, the more audible this problem becomes, unfortunately ...
! I did some experiments decades ago, over a number of months, which convinced me there was no obvious, simple way to get around this - every normal audio system I listen to has at least some of the distortion 'smell' that non-optimum connections give - it's the easiest way to degrade convincing sound back down to conventional hifi, !Hard wiring, or equivalent, is the only way out - the greater the potential of the system, the worse, the more audible this problem becomes, unfortunately ...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.