Wavebourn said:
One question is of course why the customer should want directional cable, unless someone told them that They Sound Better?
I have my own pet theory about that, which may or may not make sense. It goes like this:
At a certain point in time it was discovered, on engineering as well as listening grounds, that when you use shielded interconnects, it makes a difference at which end (source or sink) you ground that shield. This went so far that manufacturers put a direction arrow on the cable pointing out the 'direction' of use: the arrow should point from source (preamp) to sink (poweramp).
So there you have it: the masses noted that there are two types of cables, one with the arrow, and one type without. The one with the arrow sounds better. So, next time I need an interconnect, I'll by one of those Directional Cables!
The rest, as they say, is history. We're stuck with it now.
Jan Didden
I buy your theory, Jan. And can't understand why RCA sockets are still used in new developments.
Wavebourn said:
If you were in the audio business, would you rather sell $3.95 XLR's or $55.95 RCA's? 😉
Jan Didden
Again, much misunderstanding here. We don't want RCA's to cost a lot, they do, however, when they are made to a very high standard. Not as much as another equal quality connector such as a Swiss type like a premium Lemo.
The RCA connector has been the standard connector for at least 60 years. An equivalently made XLR connector would be even more expensive to make.
We are careful to specify good XLR connectors, but many knock-offs are made and used. Just take a magnet to your XLR connector and note what happens.
There are many here, who are so predisposed to WHY we use quality connectors, when we could use cheap knockoffs, are the type who might go to the discount tire store and get a cheap tire and brag that it only cost them a few 10's of dollars, and it lasted longer than the fancy tires the car came with.
The RCA connector has been the standard connector for at least 60 years. An equivalently made XLR connector would be even more expensive to make.
We are careful to specify good XLR connectors, but many knock-offs are made and used. Just take a magnet to your XLR connector and note what happens.
There are many here, who are so predisposed to WHY we use quality connectors, when we could use cheap knockoffs, are the type who might go to the discount tire store and get a cheap tire and brag that it only cost them a few 10's of dollars, and it lasted longer than the fancy tires the car came with.
scott wurcer said:
I made simple blind test with 5 lager beers for my brother in law. 5 same glasses, 5 beers chilled to same temperature. I tought it was impossible for him to tell the brand of beer in a blind test. He got 5/5 - it seems that practice does wonders
😀
john curl said:
Analogies to visual media fail dramatically. Image quality from a camera or telescope can easily be done simultaneously. If you actually read the "trashing" it gets down rapidly to features, personal preference and value cost tradeoff. You would be hard pressed to find a review that did not think the images from a 7" Takahashi refractor were not better than a "mass" produced Meade (for instance). For value the Russians OTOH make some nice knock-off optics that many serious amateurs prefer.
Amateur astronomy is a good comparison to audio. It is dominated by men some trying to beat the others in how much they can spend, sometimes very obviously. It also has a very active DIY community. You will find few (no) products that claim any violation of the laws of physics as a feature.
Have you ever done a split screen demo of Bluray vs DVD? I don't think there are many even totally disinterested parties that would claim they see nothing. You will find some small group that actually still prefers DVD.
john curl said:
Mr Curl,
just out of curiosity, something i've been wondering for a couple of decades, was it you who introduced the Swiss Camac connectors to Mark Lev gear ?
(beats me why you still keep on defending the CTC product after nearly 3.5 years, all first and secondhand BT owners seem pretty pleased with the item)
Let me bore you with the origin of the fancy connectors that we use today.
It started after WW2, when RCA engineers were asked to come up with a cheap connector for audio use. They already had phone connectors, but they cost too much.
So, someone came up with a formed connector made of cut ends of material that they had left over, from some other project. This became the RCA phono connector and was used with little change for about 25 years. Stamped out, with cheap insulator, unplated. Look at the back of an old Marantz, Dyna, or McIntosh and tell me different.
By the time 1973 and the JC-1 came around, the best RCA connector that we could get came from Switchcraft (I think) and was machined out of some sort of zinc alloy (I'm pretty sure) and not plated with anything special. Mark Levinson used these connectors in the JC-1 pre-preamp, and then in the JC-2 pre-preamp.
With time, these connectors discolored, but structurally, they were not too bad, except for the 'iffy' insulator.
Mark found Lemo connectors, himself, while visiting Switzerland and he changed to them, because they were well made, gold plated, and classy.
I thought he was nuts! However, in 1977, working with Noel Lee, (now of Monster), then with Symmetry, we had some Switchcraft RCA connectors gold plated (I still have some) to try out on our Symmetry Electronic Crossover. They looked pretty bad, but they didn't tarnish as much.
It was the Japanese who made the first really classy RCA connector, and in pure quality, they have never been beaten. I got some in 1978 at an audio dealer in Tokyo, then.
Later, an American firm started imported these super RCA connectors, and they called them:
Tiffany connectors (after the famous jeweler). Later, to save money, they changed to an American vendor (Vampire), but still called them Tiffany connectors for many years. We now buy from Vampire directly.
There are many cheap 'knockoffs' (get out the magnet) and also some very exotic and expensive German, etc RCA compatible connectors. They really can be pretty, sometimes.
We use good connectors, because they are well made, reliable, and can handle strain from stiff audio cables, on occasion. Woe to those who cannot see the advantage in that.
Personally, I think that BNC connectors could do as good and even a better job than any normal RCA connector. I wish we had gone to them, long ago. Too late now.
Lemo is a completely different story. I have Lemo connectors here that would replace an XLR connector, instantly, in terms of reliability, construction tolerance, and just plain CLASS. However, they cost really big dollars. Yet they are made for some good and proper industrial reason.
It started after WW2, when RCA engineers were asked to come up with a cheap connector for audio use. They already had phone connectors, but they cost too much.
So, someone came up with a formed connector made of cut ends of material that they had left over, from some other project. This became the RCA phono connector and was used with little change for about 25 years. Stamped out, with cheap insulator, unplated. Look at the back of an old Marantz, Dyna, or McIntosh and tell me different.
By the time 1973 and the JC-1 came around, the best RCA connector that we could get came from Switchcraft (I think) and was machined out of some sort of zinc alloy (I'm pretty sure) and not plated with anything special. Mark Levinson used these connectors in the JC-1 pre-preamp, and then in the JC-2 pre-preamp.
With time, these connectors discolored, but structurally, they were not too bad, except for the 'iffy' insulator.
Mark found Lemo connectors, himself, while visiting Switzerland and he changed to them, because they were well made, gold plated, and classy.
I thought he was nuts! However, in 1977, working with Noel Lee, (now of Monster), then with Symmetry, we had some Switchcraft RCA connectors gold plated (I still have some) to try out on our Symmetry Electronic Crossover. They looked pretty bad, but they didn't tarnish as much.
It was the Japanese who made the first really classy RCA connector, and in pure quality, they have never been beaten. I got some in 1978 at an audio dealer in Tokyo, then.
Later, an American firm started imported these super RCA connectors, and they called them:
Tiffany connectors (after the famous jeweler). Later, to save money, they changed to an American vendor (Vampire), but still called them Tiffany connectors for many years. We now buy from Vampire directly.
There are many cheap 'knockoffs' (get out the magnet) and also some very exotic and expensive German, etc RCA compatible connectors. They really can be pretty, sometimes.
We use good connectors, because they are well made, reliable, and can handle strain from stiff audio cables, on occasion. Woe to those who cannot see the advantage in that.
Personally, I think that BNC connectors could do as good and even a better job than any normal RCA connector. I wish we had gone to them, long ago. Too late now.
Lemo is a completely different story. I have Lemo connectors here that would replace an XLR connector, instantly, in terms of reliability, construction tolerance, and just plain CLASS. However, they cost really big dollars. Yet they are made for some good and proper industrial reason.
Here in Europe the Lemo Connectors that will fit on older Mark Levinson equipment are approx. EUR 10 each, which is less than many of the better RCA connectors. (But you have to solder the cables yourself of course)
SOME LEMO's cost 10 EUR, I have LEMO's that would cost much more and would replace XLR connectors.
I've recently used some Neutrik XLR's that were $8 and had a built in RFI ring that really worked (by actual measurment).
I usually use Neutrik XLR connectors, been using XLR since 1968 at AMPEX. Always use XLR for balanced designs. I am concerned about RFI proofing. Nonlinearity? However, long ago, 1968, I was assigned a project to RF proof a tape recorder for a radio station. Those connectors sure would have been useful on that project.
So where did the name 'Cinch' come from then, was that a later development? Cinch = RCA, right?
Jan Didden
Jan Didden
Really? When Tandy (Radio Shack) still had shops over here I often bought their 'Cinch' connectors and jacks and used them interchangably with 'RCA' connectors and sockets from other brands. They were intechangeable I thought. Never had issues with them.
Is there a difference in specs?
Edit: we called them 'tulip' plugs (they looked a bit like a tulip with 4 leaves).
Jan Didden
Is there a difference in specs?
Edit: we called them 'tulip' plugs (they looked a bit like a tulip with 4 leaves).
Jan Didden
janneman said:
Last i heard was that RCA stands for Really Contaminated Area.
Speaking about a company that went down the drain, what a hack and slice job, feels nostalgic to think about soldering RCA semis when they were still manufactured.
Were it only possible to migrate to new connectors. The first new connector (and standard) to gain broad adoption since the 1950's was the HDMI connector. That actually took a complex of "bribery and extortion" with the movie industry and a particular semiconductor company to force its adoption.
The earliest use of the "RCA" connector I have seen was in a TV tuner to IF link from the early 50's by RCA. Its virtue was very low cost.
The dominance of the incumbent is really clear with RCA connectors. The best impedance match for an RCA connector is around 30 Ohms but its been used widely for HDTV video with a 30 MHz+ bandwidth requirement over 75 Ohm coax even though the problems are very visible on screen. Its used just because its been used. Another example of this sad practice is the XLR for AESEBU interfaces. The initial standard was very poorly thought through and focused on reusing mike cables for digital audio. Initially they were not even terminated and certain lengths simply didn't work. Finally the industry is moving in fits and starts to 75 Ohm BNC interfaces for the AESEBU3 standard.
There are many better connectors both from "ancient times" any current. I'm considering using something like an eSATA connector for a digital audio interface because its a well designed high performance and inexpensive connector with a multi-gigaHertz performance profile.
For both RCA and XLR connectors look to see if the mating part of the pin is the same metal as the solder cup. Many are not with a crimped connection inside. I have found the Neutrik connectors to not be as well made as some of the others, particularly the Switchcraft connectors. There seems to be a "European must be better" aspect at work. The Neutrik are well designed, cost effective to manufacture etc. but the materials are not as rugged or abuse resistant. I would not use the insulation displacement version for high quality audio.
At the extreme for a moving coil phono input I am looking for isothermal connections since the thermocouple effect can create a dc component with an amplitude as high as an audio signal. With the vogue for really small thin connection points it can be a serious problem. A sudden breeze can cause a big dc shift that throws everything off kilter. Large heavy brass connectors take more energy to change temperature.
I have no idea how the Cinch name became connected with RCA connectors. In the US it refers to this company http://www.cinch.com/index.cinch and the Cinch Jones connector Jones
The earliest use of the "RCA" connector I have seen was in a TV tuner to IF link from the early 50's by RCA. Its virtue was very low cost.
The dominance of the incumbent is really clear with RCA connectors. The best impedance match for an RCA connector is around 30 Ohms but its been used widely for HDTV video with a 30 MHz+ bandwidth requirement over 75 Ohm coax even though the problems are very visible on screen. Its used just because its been used. Another example of this sad practice is the XLR for AESEBU interfaces. The initial standard was very poorly thought through and focused on reusing mike cables for digital audio. Initially they were not even terminated and certain lengths simply didn't work. Finally the industry is moving in fits and starts to 75 Ohm BNC interfaces for the AESEBU3 standard.
There are many better connectors both from "ancient times" any current. I'm considering using something like an eSATA connector for a digital audio interface because its a well designed high performance and inexpensive connector with a multi-gigaHertz performance profile.
For both RCA and XLR connectors look to see if the mating part of the pin is the same metal as the solder cup. Many are not with a crimped connection inside. I have found the Neutrik connectors to not be as well made as some of the others, particularly the Switchcraft connectors. There seems to be a "European must be better" aspect at work. The Neutrik are well designed, cost effective to manufacture etc. but the materials are not as rugged or abuse resistant. I would not use the insulation displacement version for high quality audio.
At the extreme for a moving coil phono input I am looking for isothermal connections since the thermocouple effect can create a dc component with an amplitude as high as an audio signal. With the vogue for really small thin connection points it can be a serious problem. A sudden breeze can cause a big dc shift that throws everything off kilter. Large heavy brass connectors take more energy to change temperature.
I have no idea how the Cinch name became connected with RCA connectors. In the US it refers to this company http://www.cinch.com/index.cinch and the Cinch Jones connector Jones
Thanks, Demian, I was thinking that a Cinch connector was a Jones connector. Now, I know where I got the connection.
janneman said:
There was no international standardization on the RCA connector until the late 90's. I can check tomorrow on the current status of that effort. There are some super high end RCA connectors that are incompatible with the standardized dimensions.
john curl said:
One of the guys on the standards commitee is a DIY contributor on another board. I got a good 10-20dB reduction of pickup of digital hash from a small digital recorder (classic pin 1 problem).
1audio said:
I tried in vain 30yr. ago to find a reference to the thermocouple properties of plated metals. Having both sides of a connector gold plated did not totally eliminate thermocouples, but I was worried about fractions of a microvolt per degree. Pure metals usually have very low thermocouple effects, I'm surprised you find large signals. Aluminum to gold plated Kovar for instance is only a couple of microvolts per degree.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.