Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (
More info?)
On 29 Sep 2004 23:55:21 GMT, langvid@pacbell.net (Robert C. Lang)
wrote:
>Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<cj4bt10gd2@news1.newsguy.com>...
>> On 25 Sep 2004 15:09:29 GMT, markzimmerman@aol.com (MarkZimmerman)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >What exactly is the difference between these two different termination? Or, am
>> >I confoozed?
>>
>> RCA is a two-conductor coaxial connector used on most domestic audio
>> gear, while XLR is a professional grade shielded and locking gas-tight
>> connector with three, four or five pins, plus the external screen
>> body. There is a *world* of difference!
>
>Is there suppose to be a difference sonically?
Depends if balanced operation makes a difference.
> Because in *most* cases
>I can't tell the difference. In longer runs the XLR is defintely a hum
>fighter when compared to the RCA connections.
Quite so.
> Of course, I always use
>XLR professionally (my videography business) because you can't afford
>to have an untimely disconnect as will happen with insecure RCA
>connections. Besides all my video gear has only XLR for the main
>connections, although there are RCA connections for monitoring
>purposes.
>
>But for my audio systems, over the years, as long as I keep my
>interconnects short, and had no inherent hum problems, I have found
>there was little or no difference in sound that I could readily detect
>between RCA and XLR connections.
Agreed.
>Also, I have found that some gear has some very high quality (visually
>well constructed) RCA connections, while other gear could have cheaply
>made XLR type connections.
I guess that's a possiblity, as bad connections IME account for more
than 90% of reported sonic differences.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering