Ergonomics (cable rant)

[Ceburaska]

Having just put a new item in my system, I had to go through the purgatory of cable detach/ reattach. Thankfully I’m no longer a fully fledged Naimite (DIN interconnects suck!), but even with RCA or XLR it is still an enormous pain, especially in a London size flat.
I never particularly bought into cable fetishism (a couple of >£100 power cords and interconnects) because of this, and it might well have coloured my subjective assessment that they made sod all difference.
Anyway, just idle curiosity as to whether anyone else sometimes thinks of just getting a Sonos or other wireless back end (obviously it couldn’t replace my turntables).
Or has anyone gone for the wireless LS50s?
Or B&O wisa?
I saw some measurements from Keith on the LS50s, but what are the stats generally on wireless?
Come one, I really want to have a bonfire of all my bloody wires some day!

 

[Purité Audio]

You can Bluetooth music to the LS50’s but I believe the medium isn’t capable of lossless, my kids like it though!
Keith

 

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

The only thing wireless speakers accomplish is eliminating speaker wires. You still have to plug all your source components into the front end – with cables.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

 

[DonH56]

And you have to plug the speakers themselves into the wall...

 

[Vincent Kars]

If you have a wireless router, you can connect devices wireless.
Oh yeah, you need to power this wireless router.

The same applies to wireless speaker, the sources can be connected wireless and oh yeah, you have to power the electronics in side.

There are a couple of standards allowing you to transmit audio wireless.

Bluetooth.
Convenient, no smartphone without it:
- Limited range (10m)
- Lossy compression. About 350 kbs a channel hence pretty much like high bitrate MP3.

Wisa
Wireless Speaker & Audio (WiSA) technology is an open industry standard to connect speakers wireless.
It allows for lossless 24-bit audio with sample rates of 32, 44.1, 48, and 96 kHz
It supports 2 channel up to 7.1 surround.
It operates in the 5Ghz U-NII band.

A bit rare, B&O and Dynaudio (Xeo series) come to mind.
You still need a box (transmitter) handling the inputs.

DLNA
It can be done both wired and wireless.
DLNA (Digital Living Network Alliance) is the industry standard making all kind of AV-gear communicates with each other over the home network. It allows you to control one device with another, stream audio or video over the network, etc.
It supports lossless.
Maybe there are active speakers with a DLNA input.

 

[Thomas savage]

Having just put a new item in my system, I had to go through the purgatory of cable detach/ reattach. Thankfully I’m no longer a fully fledged Naimite (DIN interconnects suck!), but even with RCA or XLR it is still an enormous pain, especially in a London size flat.
I never particularly bought into cable fetishism (a couple of >£100 power cords and interconnects) because of this, and it might well have coloured my subjective assessment that they made sod all difference.
Anyway, just idle curiosity as to whether anyone else sometimes thinks of just getting a Sonos or other wireless back end (obviously it couldn’t replace my turntables).
Or has anyone gone for the wireless LS50s?
Or B&O wisa?
I saw some measurements from Keith on the LS50s, but what are the stats generally on wireless?
Come one, I really want to have a bonfire of all my bloody wires some day!

I dream of cable free hifi , from what Iv heard there’s nothing wrong with wireless audio streaming if it’s implemented properly.

I don’t know but it must be possible to digitise your TT output and send it wirelessly to a pair of suitable speakers ?

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Wireless connections have little appeal to me. They may work within limits for some, but I still do not trust them for audio or video.

Since I got off the expensive cable bandwagon and found some excellent performing cables at reasonable prices, cables are no big deal to me. Yes, there is a mildly complex but straightforward wiring scheme in my computer network, consisting of cheap Cat6 or Cat7 Ethernet cables between router, 8-port switch, PC, NAS, and on to other jacks around the house for another PC and a smart, streaming bedroom TV. And, WiFi is there for portable devices, like the iPad I am now typing on, my cellphone, etc.

But, since committing all listening and watching to my Media PC, the only audio/video cables my 7.1 system needs are:

- a 5-meter USB cable PC to my DAC
- a 5-meter HDMI cable PC to my TV monitor
- 8 mini-XLR to XLR adapters to XLR cables from DAC to amps and subwoofer
- 7 sets of speaker cables, each 8 ft. or less

Only the mini-XLR to XLR adapters were a little hard to find, but my DAC needs the minis. The PC, NAS and computer network stuff is all in a utility room adjoining my listening room.

I do not find any issues with ergonomics, although I did on moving in have long front to back XLR cables installed under the floor for my four surround plus back channel amps close to those speakers. There are no other audio/video interconnects in my main system, though plenty of power cables.

When it comes to interconnects, I have long despised RCA unbalanced connections. So, I have none of those in my system, and I probably never will again. XLRs are, by contrast, a well-engineered pleasure to use.

And, once it is done, it's done. My cables have not moved for about 6 years since moving to my current house.

 

[amirm]

We are suffering from ancient connector syndrome though. Take HDMI. We send fully uncompressed video on it when we could send the compressed bit stream and let the decoder be in the TV. TVs already have these decoders for online video anyway. Uncompressed video has huge bandwidth and as such, is pain in the neck to send long distances. We should have made the transition years ago to encrypted compressed streams.

RCA jacks are a pain too without locking mechanism or a sense that they are fully plugged in. XLR connectors solve this problem but they are huge and ungainly. I am not trying to tow my audio equipment with them.

 

[stunta]

HDMI is a sad piece of tech that caught on when Ethernet already existed. Requiring hardware updates for newer protocol versions is fundamentally broken unless the newer version needs greater processing power.

Has anyone here worked with HDBaseT? I haven't looked into it in detail, but if we could standardize on this one cable type (CatX), that would be wonderful. I hate cables and the clutter they cause, but they are still more reliable than wireless and less vulnerable to interference if made properly. We really should be using one cable type for all A/V and network applications.

As for RCA vs. XLR, the only advantage I see with RCA is that if you trip over cables, you are less likely to pull the equipment down with you

 

[svart-hvitt]

We are suffering from ancient connector syndrome though. Take HDMI. We send fully uncompressed video on it when we could send the compressed bit stream and let the decoder be in the TV. TVs already have these decoders for online video anyway. Uncompressed video has huge bandwidth and as such, is pain in the neck to send long distances. We should have made the transition years ago to encrypted compressed streams.

RCA jacks are a pin too without locking mechanism or a sense that they are fully plugged in. XLR connectors solve this problem but they are huge and ungainly. I am not trying to tow my audio equipment with them.

Still, Apple never managed to make HDIM 2.0 out of HDMI 1.2. So Apple products were stuck with old technology just months after they introduced their Mac Pro in 2013/14.

My point is, I agree that we should leave it to software to do the fancy stuff while we let wires be wires. But on the other hand, it seems like there are some things you can't fix by software.

When it comes to XLR connectors, they can readily be exchanged with RJ45 ones.

 

[DonH56]

They make mini XLR connectors, surprised they have not caught on in the audio world given how much is crammed on the back of an AVR. OTOH they probably aren't big enough for audiophile "cred".

 

[Wayne]

They make mini XLR connectors, surprised they have not caught on in the audio world given how much is crammed on the back of an AVR. OTOH they probably aren't big enough for audiophile "cred".

Thanks, Don. I was not aware (and I suspect many others) of the mini XLR. Why have you been keeping it a secret?

They are readily available on Amazon and elsewhere.

http://www.switchcraft.com/Category.aspx?Parent=806

https://www.amazon.com/Audix-CBLM25-Mini-XLR-F-XLR-M-cable/dp/B002VSNHGI

 

[svart-hvitt]

Thanks, Don. I was not aware (and I suspect many others) of the mini XLR. Why have you been keeping it a secret?

They are readily available on Amazon and elsewhere.

http://www.switchcraft.com/Category.aspx?Parent=806

https://www.amazon.com/Audix-CBLM25-Mini-XLR-F-XLR-M-cable/dp/B002VSNHGI

Take a look at this one as well:

http://www.studiohub.com

 

[DonH56]

They've been around a long time, mostly on small mics and beltpacks for wireless mics. Our church choir (hanging) mics and wireless mic beltpacks use them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XLR_connector -- look at bottom for a picture comparing them.

They are available from a lot of places, along with the usual adapters to regular XLR, TRS, etc.

 

[Blumlein 88]

They've been around a long time, mostly on small mics and beltpacks for wireless mics. Our church choir (hanging) mics and wireless mic beltpacks use them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XLR_connector -- look at bottom for a picture comparing them.

They are available from a lot of places, along with the usual adapters to regular XLR, TRS, etc.

I've long thought the small headphone jack and cables would make a fine low cost method of balanced home audio connection.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

HDMI is a sad piece of tech that caught on when Ethernet already existed. Requiring hardware updates for newer protocol versions is fundamentally broken unless the newer version needs greater processing power.

Has anyone here worked with HDBaseT? I haven't looked into it in detail, but if we could standardize on this one cable type (CatX), that would be wonderful. I hate cables and the clutter they cause, but they are still more reliable than wireless and less vulnerable to interference if made properly. We really should be using one cable type for all A/V and network applications.

As for RCA vs. XLR, the only advantage I see with RCA is that if you trip over cables, you are less likely to pull the equipment down with you

True. HDMI has had many technical shortcomings, being designed by a multi-company committee as it was. But, the key is not its technology, which is closed and must be licensed with strict restrictions. One of those restrictions made it a way force the use of HDCP for DRM, with minor exceptions like video cameras, etc.

Yes, open, unrestricted protocols like Ethernet are nice for consumers, but content providers hate, hate, hate that. I would, too, if I were one of them. Otherwise, there would be a much easier gateway to widespread piracy than already existed. I truly wish the world could be DRM-free via universal open standards. I also wish I did not need to lock my front door or my car. But, I also wonder if we would have anybody at all producing any video/audio content if it could be easily pirated, given away or resold in a utopian world totally free of restrictions and speed bumps like DRM and legal sanctions.

Also, if you have an unsophisticated consumer just wanting to hook his cable box or BD player to his TV, forcing him to use Ethernet might have caused technical problems even as it solved some others. Also, as I recall, gigabit Ethernet was neither cheap or widespread when HDMI was introduced and hidef video/hirez audio were known to be on the near term horizon for the industry and consumers.

Also, HDMI was a plug'n play audio/video solution to the consumer's benefit. Ethernet audio to DACs or AV processors is still to this day a tiny, not well developed niche. DVI already existed and was a video-only precursor to HDMI, but no audio, as with HDMI. DisplayPort never did not seem to be taken seriously, though it could handle audio and HDCP.

So, while HDMI has had it weaknesses, I think there are many good reasons for the industry to have developed it when they did. It would be very hard to unseat it now.

The thing I always hated most about it was the loose, friction-only connection, a very poor choice by its design committee. Fortunately, I discovered HDMI cables with simple, compatible, locking connections years ago. So, no problem for me.

 

[svart-hvitt]

True. HDMI has had many technical shortcomings, being designed by a multi-company committee as it was. But, the key is not its technology, which is closed and must be licensed with strict restrictions. One of those restrictions made it a way force the use of HDCP for DRM, with minor exceptions like video cameras, etc.

Yes, open, unrestricted protocols like Ethernet are nice for consumers, but content providers hate, hate, hate that. I would, too, if I were one of them. Otherwise, there would be a much easier gateway to widespread piracy than already existed. I truly wish the world could be DRM-free via universal open standards. I also wish I did not need to lock my front door or my car. But, I also wonder if we would have anybody at all producing any video/audio content if it could be easily pirated, given away or resold in a utopian world totally free of restrictions and speed bumps like DRM and legal sanctions.

Also, if you have an unsophisticated consumer just wanting to hook his cable box or BD player to his TV, forcing him to use Ethernet might have caused technical problems even as it solved some others. Also, as I recall, gigabit Ethernet was neither cheap or widespread when HDMI was introduced and hidef video/hirez audio were known to be on the near term horizon for the industry and consumers.

Also, HDMI was a plug'n play audio/video solution to the consumer's benefit. Ethernet audio to DACs or AV processors is still to this day a tiny, not well developed niche. DVI already existed and was a video-only precursor to HDMI, but no audio, as with HDMI. DisplayPort never did not seem to be taken seriously, though it could handle audio and HDCP.

So, while HDMI has had it weaknesses, I think there are many good reasons for the industry to have developed it when they did. It would be very hard to unseat it now.

The thing I always hated most about it was the loose, friction-only connection, a very poor choice by its design committee. Fortunately, I discovered HDMI cables with simple, compatible, locking connections years ago. So, no problem for me.

@Fitzcaraldo215 , you wrote "HDMI cables with simple, compatible, locking connections". Can you enlighten/show me?

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

@Fitzcaraldo215 , you wrote "HDMI cables with simple, compatible, locking connections". Can you enlighten/show me?

I use what appears to be an older version of this:

https://www.cablestogo.com/category/audio-video/av-hdmi/av-hdmi-cables/av-hdmi-grip

If you google "locking HDMI", there are a number of alternatives. But, I would not consider any that need a chassis screw to secure them.

Mine needed nothing and no special mods to the jack or chassis. Just plug 'em in. Push the release button to remove. They are almost the HDMI equivalent of XLR connectors, though the connection is still by friction, not a mechanical latch. They will pull out with sufficient force.

 

[jhaider]

Agreed, the state of cable ergonomics is sad. I would love to see Neutrik introduce a mini Speakon for domestic and studio use. I discovered Speakon at AXPONA in Atlanta several years ago. Siegfried Linkwitz used them on his ORION dipole. With that in mind I specified them for our living room wiring because, with a toddler, they seemed the safest option by far. You can't short the conductors or change polarity without opening the connectors and unscrewing the wires. But they are bulky, because they need to stand up to road abuse. A lower profile Speakon is the natural evolution for home speaker terminations.

Has anyone here worked with HDBaseT? I haven't looked into it in detail, but if we could standardize on this one cable type (CatX), that would be wonderful.

Sample size of 1, but...HDbaseT did not work well in our home. Our equipment is on the side, and the TV is in front. There is a large doorway in the way of a baseboard cable run, so they went up and behind the crown molding. Our run is between 40-50 feet. I went through multiple sets of baluns from three different brands: Ethereal, Wyrestorm, Binary. At the time we had a 1080p TV. We had dropouts from all three. The Wyrestorm was the best, but it had problems with dropouts and IR reliability. It also had to be plugged in at both ends.

One issue may be that our installer used cat5e instead of cat6. Or maybe his RJ45 terminations were a little suspect. He used standard crimp connectors, not one of the field termination ones that require parallel pliers. I don't know. I specified the audio cabling and terminations in detail because I know and care more about that. I figured the integrator had the video stuff down.

We solved our problem by having an HDMI cable and IR extender installed. The overpriced HDMI cable I bought from the integrator had to be replaced in under a year because the integrator didn't install an 18.2G cable and we upgraded our TV, but still.

 

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

They make mini XLR connectors, surprised they have not caught on in the audio world given how much is crammed on the back of an AVR. OTOH they probably aren't big enough for audiophile "cred".

The problem with the mini XLR, in my opinion, is that it is too small to accept a sufficiently robust cable. For example, a constant problem with the wireless mics you mentioned is an internal conductor of the tiny, fragile cable breaking just beyond the connector (where there is considerable bending and flexing of the cable).

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt