Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
I need a screened stereo RCA to 3.5 mm TRS cable. I have found these two:
IXOS XHA205 http://www.ixos.co.uk/us/ixos-produc...ry=1&SubCat=24 QED Performance Audio J2P http://www.qed.co.uk/98/gb/product/p.../audio_j2p.htm Any other suggestions? /August |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 07:56:54 -0700, August Karlstrom wrote
(in article ): I need a screened stereo RCA to 3.5 mm TRS cable. I have found these two: IXOS XHA205 http://www.ixos.co.uk/us/ixos-products- detail.asp?PROID=118&Category=1&SubCat= 24 QED Performance Audio J2P http://www.qed.co.uk/98/gb/product/p.../audio_j2p.htm Any other suggestions? /August If you've found two, why would you need other suggestions? Buy the cheapest you can find that looks well made. Otherwise there is no difference. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 09:13:28 -0700, Dick Pierce wrote
(in article ): August Karlstrom wrote: I need a screened stereo RCA to 3.5 mm TRS cable. I have found these two: IXOS XHA205 http://www.ixos.co.uk/us/ixos-produc...tegory=1&SubCa t=24 QED Performance Audio J2P http://www.qed.co.uk/98/gb/product/p.../audio_j2p.htm Wow. Impressive. By the looks of the QED cable, it certainly looks stiff enough that it would work as a nice IPod stand, assuming the poor little jack in the IPod is up to the task. But $35 for a 5 foot cable of this sort? Puhlease! I bought at a local electronics store 4-foot Philmore cables that do the same thing. They too sport * 99.999% Oxygen Free Copper conductors (it's almost impossible to buy signal wire that's worse than this these days) * Co-axial design for enhanced signal transfer (Yup, coax in these too) * Electrical shielding for superior interference immunity (yup, shielded, amaxing what that coax can do) * 24K gold plated Stereo Jack connectors (couldn't find any in the ENTIRE store that weren't) * Precision engineered plug with integrated grip (got 'em) Big difference being is that I paid less $35 for 5 of them. Yep. Buy the best made cheap ones you can find. There is no sonic difference between any of them. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 2010-10-05 21:09, Audio Empire wrote:
If you've found two, why would you need other suggestions? Buy the cheapest you can find that looks well made. Otherwise there is no difference. I was thinking someone might know of a cable which is better and/or cheaper. Do you have any concrete suggestions? What would you buy? /August -- The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague. --Edsger Dijkstra |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 2010-10-05 21:11, Audio Empire wrote:
Yep. Buy the best made cheap ones you can find. There is no sonic difference between any of them. Have you double blind-tested interconnects as well (as speaker wire)? /August -- The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague. --Edsger Dijkstra |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 2010-10-05 18:13, Dick Pierce wrote:
I bought at a local electronics store 4-foot Philmore cables that do the same thing. They too sport Do you have a URL to the product you're talking about? /August -- The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague. --Edsger Dijkstra |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:41:40 -0700, August Karlstrom wrote
(in article ): On 2010-10-05 21:11, Audio Empire wrote: Yep. Buy the best made cheap ones you can find. There is no sonic difference between any of them. Have you double blind-tested interconnects as well (as speaker wire)? /August Yes. Many have. None have found any difference. And the measurements predict that outcome. As I have said many times, wire at audio frequencies is pretty simple stuff, and the measurements and calculations for all of the possible interactions of resistance, capacitance, and inductance on any of them are so negligable in the typical lengths used for domestic stereo systems that it is simply impossible for them to have ANY DETECTABLE sonic or electrical effect on the signal passing through them at all. |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:27:28 -0700, August Karlstrom wrote
(in article ): On 2010-10-05 21:09, Audio Empire wrote: If you've found two, why would you need other suggestions? Buy the cheapest you can find that looks well made. Otherwise there is no difference. I was thinking someone might know of a cable which is better and/or cheaper. Do you have any concrete suggestions? What would you buy? The cheapest cable I could buy. Those Chinese-made Philmore cables mentioned by someone else are as good as any. Don't get suckered-in by the "Cable-Sound" crowd. The only way that a cable could make even the slightest difference would be if its manufacturer PURPOSELY designed it to be a filter instead of merely a conductor. One caveat, though. If you are going to use this cable on a portable device like an iPod-type unit, buy the thinest and most flexible cable you can find. You certainly don't want a cable that weighs as much or more than the unit itself. You won't be able to set it on a table or shelf where you want it and have it stay there if the cable is too heavy or too stiff, or both. |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:56:45 -0700, Dick Pierce wrote
(in article ): August Karlstrom wrote: On 2010-10-05 21:09, Audio Empire wrote: If you've found two, why would you need other suggestions? Buy the cheapest you can find that looks well made. Otherwise there is no difference. I was thinking someone might know of a cable which is better and/or cheaper. Do you have any concrete suggestions? What would you buy? It's VERY doubtful that any of the expensive cables are better than the ceaper ones in any objective, technical way as far as the propogation of an audio signal between two audio devices is concerned. There may be other criteria you have not revealed here, such as apperance, color, or other attributes that have no bearing on the signal quality that may make you choose one over the other. But, as far as connecting two audio devices together, there's nothing at all to suggest that the more expensive ones are any better at that job. Therefore, if all things electrical are the same, in my book, by definition, cheaper is better. Absolutely. Cheaper is probably thinner, lighter, and more flexible to boot. |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
"August Karlstrom" wrote in message
I need a screened stereo RCA to 3.5 mm TRS cable. I have found these two: IXOS XHA205 http://www.ixos.co.uk/us/ixos-produc...ry=1&SubCat=24 QED Performance Audio J2P http://www.qed.co.uk/98/gb/product/p.../audio_j2p.htm Any other suggestions? Visit your nearest Radio Shack or other electronics store. This cable is probably going to be driven by the headphone jack on some portable piece, so the source impedance will be low and available singal will be relatively high. Just about anything that conducts electricity fairly marginally, and has minimal insulation between the conductors will work excellently. I favor 3.5 mm plugs with the cable coming out at a right angle to minimize stress on the jack in the piece of equipment. Both of the alternatives listed above thus fail my standards for practical use. http://www.markertek.com/Cables-Conn.../YRA-167.xhtml |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
... "August Karlstrom" wrote in message I need a screened stereo RCA to 3.5 mm TRS cable. I have found these two: IXOS XHA205 http://www.ixos.co.uk/us/ixos-produc...ry=1&SubCat=24 QED Performance Audio J2P http://www.qed.co.uk/98/gb/product/p.../audio_j2p.htm http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2 Monoprice sells good cheap stuff. I would imagine OEM for a lot of "name" brands. I took apart a Radio Shack RCA cable last week and it was really cruddy wire inside. My .02. mg |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 2010-10-07 01:09, MG wrote:
Monoprice sells good cheap stuff. I would imagine OEM for a lot of "name" brands. I took apart a Radio Shack RCA cable last week and it was really cruddy wire inside. My .02. Thanks for the tip (although I'm looking for a male to male cable). /August |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 16:09:23 -0700, MG wrote
(in article ): "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "August Karlstrom" wrote in message I need a screened stereo RCA to 3.5 mm TRS cable. I have found these two: IXOS XHA205 http://www.ixos.co.uk/us/ixos-produc...ategory=1&SubC at=24 QED Performance Audio J2P http://www.qed.co.uk/98/gb/product/p.../audio_j2p.htm http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...18&cs_id=10218 04&p_id=5611&seq=1&format=2 Monoprice sells good cheap stuff. I would imagine OEM for a lot of "name" brands. I took apart a Radio Shack RCA cable last week and it was really cruddy wire inside. My .02. mg Do you mean the wire wasn't copper, or just that the wire was thin with tiny strands? Most of these mini-stereo TRS to RCA cables are purposely made light, with thin-gauge wire because the portable devices that they connect to are usually light in weight themselves. I've seen these mini-TRS to RCA cables from "high-end" sellers like Audioquest which are very robust, stiff, heavy, and expensive. When you connect them to something like an iPod they have two characteristics: The players won't stay on the table or shelf where you set them, and they put undo strain on the jack in the portable player, making it loose and unreliable over time. Usually, these jacks cannot be replaced (without replacing the entire guts of the phone or player) and you're left with an expensive device that's suddenly useless. The cheap, light ones sound exactly like the heavy, expensive ones and are more practical. Don't misjudge the cheap Radio Shack cable because the wire is thin. Remember, it's carrying neither much voltage nor much current and for it's length, is, in fact, totally sufficient to its task. |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 10/7/2010 2:09 PM, Audio Empire wrote:
The cheap, light ones sound exactly like the heavy, expensive ones and are more practical. ^^^^^^ Money quote ^^^^^ As someone who worked in pro audio and broadcasting, I tend to favor heavy-duty physically strong cabling to stand up to the abuse of a hostile environment. However, connecting a cable made to withstand an attack by a rabid wombat on PCP (or a musician or DJ, who do more or less the same thing to the cables) to an iPod is overkill. Lightweight, easily replacable cables are the way to go for this application. BTW, while the wire in the RadioShack cable may be thin, it's probably far thicker than the traces on the PC board inside the device. Electrically, it doesn't make any difference, physically the cheap RS cables strong enough for the application. //Walt |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 11:59:15 -0700, Walt wrote
(in article ): On 10/7/2010 2:09 PM, Audio Empire wrote: The cheap, light ones sound exactly like the heavy, expensive ones and are more practical. ^^^^^^ Money quote ^^^^^ As someone who worked in pro audio and broadcasting, I tend to favor heavy-duty physically strong cabling to stand up to the abuse of a hostile environment. However, connecting a cable made to withstand an attack by a rabid wombat on PCP (or a musician or DJ, who do more or less the same thing to the cables) to an iPod is overkill. Lightweight, easily replacable cables are the way to go for this application. BTW, while the wire in the RadioShack cable may be thin, it's probably far thicker than the traces on the PC board inside the device. Electrically, it doesn't make any difference, physically the cheap RS cables strong enough for the application. //Walt Very well put. and quite true. The traces on many of these portable devices are incredibly tiny and many of the SOIC packages for the integrated circuit chips are often so small that they look impossibly tiny. These things are marvels of miniaturization. |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 2010-10-07 20:59, Walt wrote:
BTW, while the wire in the RadioShack cable may be thin, it's probably far thicker than the traces on the PC board inside the device. Electrically, it doesn't make any difference, physically the cheap RS cables strong enough for the application. As far as I know a typical radio shack cable is not shielded and is therefore susceptible to noise from other devices and cables. By the way, I will connect the cable to line in (TRS) on my Olympus LS-10 PCM recorder on one end and to line out (RCA) of my amplifier on the other to record some vinyl (my Creek Destiny amplifier has an internal phono amplifier). /August -- The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague. --Edsger Dijkstra |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:37:46 -0700, August Karlstrom wrote
(in article ): On 2010-10-07 20:59, Walt wrote: BTW, while the wire in the RadioShack cable may be thin, it's probably far thicker than the traces on the PC board inside the device. Electrically, it doesn't make any difference, physically the cheap RS cables strong enough for the application. As far as I know a typical radio shack cable is not shielded and is therefore susceptible to noise from other devices and cables. I suspect that it IS shielded, but even if it's not, it won't make a lot of difference as the headphone output on a typical iPod-like device is extremely low impedance and wouldn't necessarily need shielding any more than speaker cable needs to be shielded and for pretty much the same reason. By the way, I will connect the cable to line in (TRS) on my Olympus LS-10 PCM recorder on one end and to line out (RCA) of my amplifier on the other to record some vinyl (my Creek Destiny amplifier has an internal phono amplifier). Oooh, not using it with an iPod-like device I see. I still doubt if it will be a problem if not shielded, but I still suspect that it is. |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
"Audio Empire" wrote in message
... On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 16:09:23 -0700, MG wrote (in article ): "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "August Karlstrom" wrote in message I need a screened stereo RCA to 3.5 mm TRS cable. I have found these two: IXOS XHA205 http://www.ixos.co.uk/us/ixos-produc...ategory=1&SubC at=24 QED Performance Audio J2P http://www.qed.co.uk/98/gb/product/p.../audio_j2p.htm http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...18&cs_id=10218 04&p_id=5611&seq=1&format=2 Monoprice sells good cheap stuff. I would imagine OEM for a lot of "name" brands. I took apart a Radio Shack RCA cable last week and it was really cruddy wire inside. My .02. mg Do you mean the wire wasn't copper, or just that the wire was thin with tiny strands? Most of these mini-stereo TRS to RCA cables are purposely made light, with thin-gauge wire because the portable devices that they connect to are usually light in weight themselves. I've seen these mini-TRS to RCA cables from "high-end" sellers like Audioquest which are very robust, stiff, heavy, and expensive. When you connect them to something like an iPod they have two characteristics: The players won't stay on the table or shelf where you set them, and they put undo strain on the jack in the portable player, making it loose and unreliable over time. Usually, these jacks cannot be replaced (without replacing the entire guts of the phone or player) and you're left with an expensive device that's suddenly useless. The cheap, light ones sound exactly like the heavy, expensive ones and are more practical. Don't misjudge the cheap Radio Shack cable because the wire is thin. Remember, it's carrying neither much voltage nor much current and for it's length, is, in fact, totally sufficient to its task. I was building something else out of them and the strands were really thin and flimsy. I imagine that if I left them intact, they would be ok. But they cost a lot more than the Monoprice versions, if I have time for ordering and shipping. |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 10/7/2010 7:37 PM, August Karlstrom wrote:
On 2010-10-07 20:59, Walt wrote: BTW, while the wire in the RadioShack cable may be thin, it's probably far thicker than the traces on the PC board inside the device. Electrically, it doesn't make any difference, physically the cheap RS cables strong enough for the application. As far as I know a typical radio shack cable is not shielded and is therefore susceptible to noise from other devices and cables. I've seen and used thousands of cheap consumer cables from Radio Shack and other sources and have never seen an unshielded line level cable. I picked one up from Best Buy over the weekend (out of town for an in-law's wedding, they wanted to hook up their computer to the PA, so I hopped in the car and fetched the cable from the nearest source). The cable was $5 and most definitely shielded. And as Audio Empire notes, even if it isn't shielded it probably won't matter. Think of shielding like waterproofing - you don't need to waterproof your gear for use in your living room, likewise you don't need shielding for short runs in a low RF environment. By the way, I will connect the cable to line in (TRS) on my Olympus LS-10 PCM recorder on one end and to line out (RCA) of my amplifier on the other to record some vinyl (my Creek Destiny amplifier has an internal phono amplifier). I would use the $5 Best Buy cable without hesitation. //Walt |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 2010-10-12 21:58, Walt wrote:
I've seen and used thousands of cheap consumer cables from Radio Shack and other sources and have never seen an unshielded line level cable. OK, I thought the thicker interconnects where the shielded ones. And as Audio Empire notes, even if it isn't shielded it probably won't matter. Think of shielding like waterproofing - you don't need to waterproof your gear for use in your living room, likewise you don't need shielding for short runs in a low RF environment. By the way, do you know if the "pollution" from wireless networks may be an issue in this context? It's interesting to note that there seems to be a consensus in this newsgroup about the (lack of) influence of cables. In the high-end community as a whole I guess there are more diverse opinions about the issue. /August |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:45:38 -0700, August Karlstrom wrote
(in article ): On 2010-10-12 21:58, Walt wrote: I've seen and used thousands of cheap consumer cables from Radio Shack and other sources and have never seen an unshielded line level cable. OK, I thought the thicker interconnects where the shielded ones. And as Audio Empire notes, even if it isn't shielded it probably won't matter. Think of shielding like waterproofing - you don't need to waterproof your gear for use in your living room, likewise you don't need shielding for short runs in a low RF environment. By the way, do you know if the "pollution" from wireless networks may be an issue in this context? Probably not. susceptibility to RF is dependent on many factors. The impedance of the source component (most portable devices outputs are designed to drive headphones, which are usually 50 Ohms (there are exceptions, of course) so the outputs are generally very low source impedance), another factor is the gain required of the stage you are driving. For instance, a moving-coil phono preamp input would be more susceptible to RF interference simply because it has a lot of gain while the input from a portable device would be line-level which doesn't require much gain at all. Then there is bandwidth. Very wide bandwidth preamps and power amps might be more susceptible to RF interference than amplifying devices with more restricted bandwidth. Next down the list are dirty connections. Poor or dirty jacks and plugs can form "diode" barriers where they mate. These "diodes" can often act as radio "detectors" (like an old Galena crystal and cat's whisker detector in a crystal set) and can actually demodulate the RF into sound (a strong nearby radio station, for instance, might appear in one's speakers as fully understandable speech or music). The best way to avoid that is to use contact cleaners and enhancers to keep the mating surfaces clean. Usually it's a combination of things that tend to add-up to an audio circuit that's prone to RF interference. For instance a dirty or otherwise poor cartridge clip in a tone arm head shell, feeding a wide bandwidth moving-coil head amp through poorly shielded or badly grounded interconnect could be highly prone to noise and distortion from local RF sources such as blue-tooth devices, strong local radio stations and ham radio rigs, or computer hash caused by the radiation of various clock signals, etc. It's interesting to note that there seems to be a consensus in this newsgroup about the (lack of) influence of cables. In the high-end community as a whole I guess there are more diverse opinions about the issue. Shielding to avoid RF interference and hum is not the same issue as "Interconnect or cable sound". Whether a cable is properly designed to minimize interference or not has nothing at all to do with whether that cable "improves" the sonic performance of one's stereo. Any properly made and installed shielded cable should stop interference, but both a $5 shielded Radio Shack interconnect and a $4000 pair of Nordost Valhallas will do that quite nicely. They will also sound the same between any two components you wish to connect together as well. |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
In article ,
August Karlstrom wrote: It's interesting to note that there seems to be a consensus in this newsgroup about the (lack of) influence of cables. In the high-end community as a whole I guess there are more diverse opinions about the issue. I'm not sure of the consensus. But coming out and saying that cables make a difference will likely cause an avalanche of scientific and DBT oriented posts that will put off all but the most tough-skinned. Even if cables do make a difference, it would be, in most cases a minor difference. Whether that minor difference is important to you is a matter for you and your wallet to decide. For me, this hobby is about getting the most pleasure from my music collection, and if LP's, or CD's, or amps, or cables, or particular types of speakers make that happen for me then I'm not interested in a argument about my choices. Greg |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
"August Karlstrom" wrote in message
By the way, do you know if the "pollution" from wireless networks may be an issue in this context? I've experimented with power line wireless networks and also wireless networks using high powered transmitters (up to 1 watt) and high gain antennas (well over 20 dB gain) in the same room as one of my audio systems. I think that's a theoretical ERP of about 100 watts. Standard is 10-30 milliwatts. No problems. It's interesting to note that there seems to be a consensus in this newsgroup about the (lack of) influence of cables. In the high-end community as a whole I guess there are more diverse opinions about the issue. IMO Dick Pierce understated the problem with ignorant high enders saying all sorts of weird things. You can often tell a knowlegable high ender simply from common-sense comments about cables. Unfortunately a lot of ignoreant high enders write for people who buy ink by the barrel. |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
RCA to TRS cable
On 10/12/2010 7:45 PM, August Karlstrom wrote:
On 2010-10-12 21:58, Walt wrote: And as Audio Empire notes, even if it isn't shielded it probably won't matter. Think of shielding like waterproofing - you don't need to waterproof your gear for use in your living room, likewise you don't need shielding for short runs in a low RF environment. By the way, do you know if the "pollution" from wireless networks may be an issue in this context? As others have noted, the answer is very likely "no". WIFI is fairly low power so it's propensity to cause interference is correspondingly low. As an aside, I should note that while shielding probably won't make a difference in your situation, for phono interconnects it might. Your line level device is going to put out a signal on the order of 1 volt while a phono signal is typically around 1 microvolt, or about 3 orders of magnitude lower. Thus it takes 1000 times less interference to be audible in a phono signal vs a line level signal. Of course, this doesn't mean that you should spend big $$$$ on a phono cable. It's interesting to note that there seems to be a consensus in this newsgroup about the (lack of) influence of cables. In the high-end community as a whole I guess there are more diverse opinions about the issue. Many of the posters here are professional audio engineers with a sound education in physics. It's a different mindset than the "magical thinking" one often finds in the audiophile press, and probably responsible for the difference. //Walt |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Is digital coaxial cable the same as standard video RCA cable? | Audio Opinions | |||
FA: New! MONSTER CABLE SuperFlat Mini Speaker Cable 20ft w/Conn. | Marketplace | |||
FA: New! MONSTER CABLE SuperFlat Mini Speaker Cable 20ft w/Connectors | Marketplace | |||
FA: MONSTER CABLE SuperFlat Mini Speaker Cable 50ft w/Connectors | Marketplace | |||
FA: Sescom CT-7 Deluxe Cable Tester : 10 Cable Types | Marketplace |