Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: DIN vs RCA connectors - technical advantage?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    99

    Default DIN vs RCA connectors - technical advantage?

    From a scientific point of view, are there any electromechanical advantages to DIN over RCA or vice-versa?

    {Moderator's comment: at audio frequency or radio frequencies?}

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    SG
    Posts
    225

    Default DIN and balanced DIN?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zemlya View Post
    From a scientific point of view, are there any electromechanical advantages to DIN over RCA or vice-versa?

    {Moderator's comment: at audio frequency or radio frequencies?}
    Usually DIN output voltage is higher.. and it always comes with a shielded Twisted pair cable. from understanding, DIN / balanced are usually meant for user who are running longer length of cable between units.. the twisted pair cable enhance common-mode noise rejection... etc

    Most would infer that the Balanced output gives more dynamic of the music playback.. better sound better soundstage better detail better transparency better

    anw, i will keen to try both..

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    847

    Default DIN or XLR - clarify please

    Are you referring to DIN, as used by Naim and DNM, or XLR, often used on professional gear ?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    England and Cyprus
    Posts
    370

    Default RCA, TNC etc.

    Both are compromised connectors for consumer electronics. The DIN system has many advantages for domestic use, but the more cumbersome RCA plugs won the day. The RCA plug particularly is pressed to serve in circumstances when it's use is far from ideal.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RCA_connector

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIN_connector

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_plug

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XLR_connector

    Although a radio frequency plug, the TNC would be the better option, if a single unbalanced audio cable with connectors was wanted.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNC_connector

    Balanced systems are probably over complex and unnecessary for the short cable runs used in domestic equipment

    It seems though that domestic audio is stuck with RCA - a plug designed to be very cheap, but now grossly over-engineered and still no better for it.

    {Moderator's comment: I think you'll find that the TNC connector is both balanced and extremely difficult to source. Our B&K test box has it as a balanced input. It's also very very fiddly to wire. RCA is extremely easy.}

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    England and Cyprus
    Posts
    370

    Default TNC or not TNC

    {Moderator's comment: I think you'll find that the TNC connector is both balanced and extremely difficult to source. Our B&K test box has it as a balanced input. It's also very very fiddly to wire. RCA is extremely easy.}
    Are we talking about the same thing? You can get them anywhere.

    http://uk.rs-online.com/web/c/?searc...c+plug&sra=oss

    And look at the PDF with the fitting instructions. One central conductor. One screen. Unbalanced.

    I think you need a crimping tool to fit them.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    479

    Default DIN = a better design

    Quote Originally Posted by Zemlya View Post
    From a scientific point of view, are there any electromechanical advantages to DIN over RCA or vice-versa?
    At audio frequencies, a resounding yes in favour of DIN.

    The contact pressure is significantly greater, resulting in better consistency and reliability.

    Also, the contacts are self-cleaning. The wiper scrapes the outside of the pin during insertion which removes any contamination to a safe area above the contact point.

    The metallic ring surrounding the pins prevents them from being touched by greasy fingers during normal use.

    All told, a far more intelligently designed system.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    479

    Default TNC better option?

    Quote Originally Posted by Labarum View Post
    Although a radio frequency plug, the TNC would be the better option
    Why would you prefer the rare TNC to the very common BNC? At audio frequencies? A BNC doesn't occupy that much more panel area than an RCA phono

    Quote Originally Posted by Moderator View Post
    Moderator's comment: I think you'll find that the TNC connector is both balanced...
    The TNC is a two pole (pin & screen) connector, very similar to BNC but threaded instead of bayonets. If balanced, this implies that the screen is not connected to the equipment ground but is effectively one of the legs of the balanced line. I believe this approach is common in decent test equipment to prevent ground loop problems.

    Given that BNC is considered good to over 10GHz, TNC seems a rather odd choice...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    99

    Default DIN at audio frequencies

    Quote Originally Posted by Zemlya View Post
    From a scientific point of view, are there any electromechanical advantages to DIN over RCA or vice-versa?

    {Moderator's comment: at audio frequency or radio frequencies?}
    Audio frequencies. I am referring to DIN, not XLR.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    England and Cyprus
    Posts
    370

    Default Connector craziness

    Quote Originally Posted by Pluto View Post
    Given that BNC is considered good to over 10GHz, TNC seems a rather odd choice...
    I've used both BNC and TNC connectors in laboratories and just plucked TNC out as an example of a well made plug that would work in the domestic audio market in preference to RCA.

    Is BNC (or TNC) ever used in pro-audio stuff, or is it always XLR? [Edit: or 1/4 inch jack?]

    For those not familiar with these components TNC and BNC are very similar. TNC have a threaded lock requiring many turns to lock, BNC has a bayonet lock, so a quarter turn does it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BNC_connector

    In the back of my mind I have the thought that there are some expensive domestic preamps that use TNC for the phono (RIAA) input. Is that right?

    But, as I said, the industry is in a rut - RCA for audio at various levels, S/PDIF, and even Composite Video. It's crazy.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    479

    Default BNC and sending digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Labarum View Post
    Is BNC (or TNC) ever used in pro-audio stuff, or is it always XLR? [Edit: or 1/4 inch jack?]
    I don't think I've ever seen a TNC in angry use.

    BNC is used extensively in digital audio kit in places where AES/EBU isn't appropriate - clocks & the like and is the de facto standard for video.

    It's interesting to note that if you want to send a digital audio signal a long way, it's better to do it on 75Ω video cable than standard XLR-terminated 110Ω balanced cable using one of these at either end.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    England and Cyprus
    Posts
    370

    Default DIN and composite cables

    DIN plugs have the great advantage that they can carry multi-channel audio.

    A three pin DIN plug will enable a single composite cable to carry a stereo signal; and a five pin DIN allows that in both directions so an analogue tape deck can be connected to a control amp (a pre-amp) with one cable. With RCA terminated cables two or four separate leads are needed.

    Jack plugs (1/4 inch or miniature) can also bear two channel stereo, but not more. For years I had a Sony Walkman Pro connected to an integrated amp with two miniature jack to phono (pair) leads.

    Those days are gone.

    AV amps have many tens of RCA sockets on the back - it just gets more crazy all the time. The SCART plugs will carry RGB and composite video as well as two channel stereo, but SCART never caught on in USA, so the video was coupled with three RCA plugs for REd, Green and Blue, and two more for the audio. Sheer Madness!

    A single HDMI plug will carry all that data in the digital domain.

    Loudspeaker plugs are another issue. The DIN loudspeaker plug is a poor affair and will not make a decent connection for good speakers.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIN_con...aker_connector

    The Speakon will handle the current but became common only in Pro Studios.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speakon_connector

    Home speakers settled on the 4mm banana plug and the crude binding post. All of this multiplies further the wires and plugs needed in a domestic audio or AV setup.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    South of England, UK
    Posts
    4,274

    Default The daftness of DIN

    Quote Originally Posted by Labarum View Post
    .... Loudspeaker plugs are another issue. The DIN loudspeaker plug is a poor affair and will not make a decent connection for good speakers...
    It's all very well to be dismissive of the phono plug and say that technically the DIN plug is superior (previous posts) but have you actually tried to solder a DIN plug? It's challenging. It needs a fine-tip iron, good eyesight, a steady hand, thin solder and much attention. And if it's a multi-way DIN (example, L-R tape in/out) that soldering nightmare has to be repeated five times.

    In my humble opinion, the DIN plug was a daft idea from the start. Too many pins crammed in too small a space; totally unsuitable for DIY preparation. The number of times in my Quad 33 days that I made a mess of wiring a DIN plug is a memory still with me! The phono plug is vastly more user friendly.

    Best of all perhaps is the XLR. Rugged, multi-pinned, pins always protected by the metal body. But functionally no benefit over the phono. And much, much bigger.
    Alan A. Shaw
    Designer, owner
    Harbeth Audio UK

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    479

    Default Phono v. BNC

    Quote Originally Posted by A.S. View Post
    It's all very well to be dismissive of the phono plug...
    OK, but I'm still wondering why we adopted the RCA phono rather than the BNC which, in many respects, is the perfect connector. The argument, originally, was that the phono was significantly cheaper. Today, an "audiophile" phono lead costs 20 and up (and up and up) while you can buy a BNC lead (good for 2GHz) for under a tenner.

    It's not logical, captain.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    South of England, UK
    Posts
    4,274

    Default BNC - another cold sweat connector ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Pluto View Post
    OK, but I'm still wondering why we adopted the RCA phono rather than the BNC which, in many respects, is the perfect connector. The argument, originally, was that the phono was significantly cheaper. Today, an "audiophile" phono lead costs 20 and up (and up and up) while you can buy a BNC lead (good for 2GHz) for under a tenner.

    It's not logical, captain.
    Bridge to engine room .... OK Scottie, buying an off-the-shelf BCN lead is one matter. But have you actually tried to assemble/solder a BNC connector yourself at your own pace let alone under Klingon attack? No strands of braid? No worry about the ridiculously small clearances between the metal parts (conductor, braid, case)? No observation that if you twist the cable/connector this way or that the signal comes or goes? No cold sweats at 4am that you really should disassemble to see if there is a potential or actual short circuit?

    Oh, and BTW: Mod1 was wrong about TNC being balanced etc.. What he meant was BNT - yes, you'll never have heard of it. That is balanced, is used on our B&K equipment and the fear that it's not correctly assembled never leaves you ....... Just try and buy one.

    My advice is stick with phono!
    Alan A. Shaw
    Designer, owner
    Harbeth Audio UK

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    England and Cyprus
    Posts
    370

    Default RCA - cheap

    Quote Originally Posted by Pluto View Post
    OK, but I'm still wondering why we adopted the RCA phono rather than the BNC which, in many respects, is the perfect connector . . . It's not logical, captain.
    Correct. The RCA plug started out as a very cheap component to enable a turntable to be plugged into the back of a radio.

    If I remember correctly the Mullard Book that set out classic designs for DIY valve audio designs - the 3.3, 5.10 and 5.20 - all specifies Belling Lee Coax connectors.(TV Coax) Now they are cheap, easy to fit, maintain the right impedance and don't connect the signal before the ground (earth).

    RCA won.

    The future?

    Active speakers with internal DACs connecting wirelessly or on a Thunderbolt/Lightpeak optical cable.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface))

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    England and Cyprus
    Posts
    370

    Default BNT .... a balanced BNC

    Quote Originally Posted by A.S. View Post
    What he meant was BNT - yes, you'll never have heard of it.
    Ah yes, I knew that beastie existed, nice double screening. Never seen one.

    http://www.hubersuhner.com/mozilla/h...-gr-series-bnt

    Double screened - now if the lads at CERN were using those, perhaps the speed of light would not be in question!


    My advice is stick with phono!
    Do we have a choice? The big boys make the decisions.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    479

    Default Who solder their own interconnects?

    Quote Originally Posted by A.S. View Post
    ...buying an off-the-shelf BNC lead is one matter. But have you actually tried to assemble/solder a BNC connector yourself at your own pace let alone under Klingon attack?
    "I cannae patch the phaser power to the shiels cap'n till I make up another BNC lead"

    But apart from you and Mr Scott, how many people do you know who solder up their own interconnects?

    Incidentally, another thing about properly made BNC plugs is that they are far easier to make up than many average phono plugs provided you cut the coax to the correct dimensions. The pin removes to make it accessible for soldering (no heating up the pin in situ to make the solder flow down it - damn, softened the plastic insulation and now the pin is eccentric).

    A phono plug could easily be made on the same principle but they are too busy making the plugs "sound good", than sensible to solder.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.S. View Post
    What [HUG1] meant was BNT
    That makes more sense, as well as conforming to B&K's typical behaviour of using components nobody has ever heard of. The very thought of wiring a triaxial connector sounds like a puzzle out of Alice in Wonderland!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    South of England, UK
    Posts
    4,274

    Default Oh what a horrible mess

    Quote Originally Posted by Pluto View Post
    ...Incidentally, another thing about properly made BNC plugs is that they are far easier to make up than many average phono plugs provided you cut the coax to the correct dimensions. The pin removes to make it accessible for soldering (no heating up the pin in situ to make the solder flow down it ...
    Oh what a wag you are, Pluto! And who holds that horrible little pin eh? You know, the one with the microscopic channel into which you should attempt to position the core which completely chokes with solder (always tin the joint before soldering - right?) leaving nowhere for the core to fit .... . Result: core insulation sheath starts to melt as you try again and again to crudely solder the core *anywhere* onto the rim of the pin at any jaunty angle possible accompanied by the unmistakeable smell .....

    Always check that the nearest A&E are open before attempting such madness.

    Nope. Phono is vastly superior in every way!
    Alan A. Shaw
    Designer, owner
    Harbeth Audio UK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •