Jump to content

Talk:XLR connector: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 38: Line 38:


* Switchcraft invented them and called them TINI Q-G. No one else does, but the partnumbers such as TA3F are well known. [[User:Meggar|Meggar]] 05:45, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)
* Switchcraft invented them and called them TINI Q-G. No one else does, but the partnumbers such as TA3F are well known. [[User:Meggar|Meggar]] 05:45, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

Everyone seems to call them Mini-XLRs. The name 'TA3F' is used equally frequently; It is the usual way of referring to the ones used with wireless microphones where they are very common. I think they are becoming more & more important as electronic gear is becoming more & more miniaturized. There needs to be a section added to the article. Switchcraft calls them Mini-XLR & Tini-QG® too. They don't seem to be available in as wide a variety of styles as the standard XLRs yet. Here is a link to the Mini XLR section of the Switchcraft Web Site. http://www.switchcraft.com/Category.aspx?Parent=891


== mono? ==
== mono? ==

Revision as of 03:28, 24 March 2014

WikiProject iconStagecraft B‑class (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Stagecraft, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconProfessional sound production B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Professional sound production, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sound recording and reproduction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed change

Proposed change, right after the photo:

EIA Standard RS-297-A describes the use of the XLR3 for audio signal level applications. Before the standard was adopted, some audio equipment manufacturers reversed the use of pin 2 (properly the normal or "hot" input) and pin 3 (inverting input). This was generally not significant when using entirely balanced signal paths, since balanced outputs will have the same polarity as their inputs and no one will know the difference. But this could be a huge problem when going from balanced to unbalanced signals, as when using an unbalanced, XLR-equipped, pin-3-hot signal processing device (like older Klark Teknik compressors and gates) with a mixing desk that had unbalanced insert points and insert cables that wired the insert connnector's shield to pin 3. The result would be no signal whatsoever, unless one rewired the insert cable or made two special adapters to swap pins 2 and 3 for each inserted channel. Such problems were only exacerbated when using cables that were wired tip-send with a ring-send desk (see tip ring sleeve). It was much better to have a processor that also had 1/4" connectors. [Can you tell I had personal experience with this???]

The pin 2 vs. pin 3 debate was such an important and almost comical issue that, during at least one Audio Engineering Society convention in the late 1980s, one manufacturer (or the AES itself?) handed out spinny wheels, with a needle mounted to a piece of cardboard that was printed with a pie shape with pieces alternately labeled "pin 2 hot" and "pin 3 hot"--showing that whether a manufacturer chose pin 2 or pin 3 was seemingly completely random. [I can take a digital photo of this wheel if anyone is interested.]

But pin 2 is now the standard. Pin 1 is always earth, and many connectors connect it internally to the connector body.

I'm probably being dense here, but I don't understand the 3rd sentence: "This was generally not significant when using entirely balanced signal paths, since balanced outputs will have the same polarity as their inputs and no one will know the difference."
1.) Why will balanced outputs always have the same polarity as their inputs? Also, 2.) if someone accidentally reversed the + and - (i.e. "hot" and "cold") signals when, say, wiring a connector, would this not cause that signal to be 180 deg. out of phase with all other signals? I'd think that would be noticed when mixing the reversed signal with anything else not so reversed. What am I missing here (e.g. what's about to really embarrass me)? Ob1-kenogle (talk) 06:07, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another proposed change, near the beginning:

The name XLR probably comes from the ITT Cannon part number. However, no one knows for sure why it was chosen, and debates about the origins of the name can be found in the archives of some of the major online audio communities. One helpful mnemonic to remember the now-standard wiring for an audio XLR connector (see below) is this:

pin 1 = X = earth/ground/shield
pin 2 = L = live/"hot"/"normal" input
pin 3 = R = return/"cold"/"inverting" input

In any case, XLR has become the standard name for these connectors, which are now made by many manufacturers apart from Cannon. Historically it is no more correct than the name "Cannon plug", which also continues to be used.

Confusion

I believe the above mention of X being for earth, L being for Live and R being for return is what tends to confuse many young people in the industry and those visiting this site.--Tm1000 01:01, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

mini XLR

what is the official name for these connectors? sometimes called "mini-XLR": They are called micro xlr mainly used of lamps for large decks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.32.187 (talk) 19:16, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


http://www.ereca.fr/telec/422acces2.jpg - Omegatron 15:37, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

  • Switchcraft invented them and called them TINI Q-G. No one else does, but the partnumbers such as TA3F are well known. Meggar 05:45, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

Everyone seems to call them Mini-XLRs. The name 'TA3F' is used equally frequently; It is the usual way of referring to the ones used with wireless microphones where they are very common. I think they are becoming more & more important as electronic gear is becoming more & more miniaturized. There needs to be a section added to the article. Switchcraft calls them Mini-XLR & Tini-QG® too. They don't seem to be available in as wide a variety of styles as the standard XLRs yet. Here is a link to the Mini XLR section of the Switchcraft Web Site. http://www.switchcraft.com/Category.aspx?Parent=891

mono?

I assume XLR only carries a mono signal? kwami 11:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I guess it could carry an unbalanced stereo signal, too, like a TRS connector, but I've never seen this used in actual products. — Omegatron 16:22, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! kwami 23:36, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The XLR-3 is used extensively in professional sound gear to carry a balanced mono signal. Stereo microphones most often has a XLR-5 connector, carrying two balanced signals. Examples of mics with this setup (not exhaustive): Royer SF24, Schoeps MSTC64.

The XLR-3 is used extensively in the UK (and probably the rest of Europe) for stereo connections from devices such as DJ dual CD players etc. to mixing desks and power amplifiers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.133.0.13 (talk) 10:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

XLR3 can carry a stereo signal if you use two cables - is that what those euro-DJ's use, or they get a stereo signal through a single XLR? That seems impossible, given the description. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flickharrison (talkcontribs) 18:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, when an XLR is used to transmit AES/EBU digital audio, then it carries 2 channels on a single connector.132.185.160.98 (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Common mode noise cancellation

Isn't the advantage of two inverted signals that the receiver can use them noise cancellation?

essentially yes as our balanced audio article says "Much of the noise induced in the cable is induced equally in both signal lines, so this noise can be easily rejected by using a differential amplifier or a balun at the input." Plugwash 19:37, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. The advantage of two signals, one inverted with respect to the other, is that you get a higher SNR at the receiver by virtue of higher signal level - since the receiver sees live-return, and return == -live, so the result is 2x live. But common mode rejection doesn't require that the "return" carry an inverted copy of the "live" signal! Common practice in a lot of the less expensive pro gear is to not actively drive the "return" at all, but instead connect it to signal ground through a resistor that matches the "live" terminal's source impedance. Noise picked up by the cable is then picked up equally in both conductors, and is cancelled by live-return. The "return" line is not required to be actively driven for that to work. This is called "resistor balancing" or "impedance balancing". Jeh (talk) 18:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is sort of off topic for this article. You guys might want to have a look at and consider improving Differential signaling, Balanced line or Balanced audio. -—Kvng 13:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

video??

the start of the article atm reads "XLR plugs and sockets are used mostly in professional audio and video electronics cabling applications. Home audio and video electronics normally use RCA connectors.". are xlr connectors used for video or just used along side video? (i've always thought it was the latter) --MilkMiruku 12:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC) your right with along side video —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.32.187 (talk) 19:17, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I've never heard of XLR connectors being used for video, and they're not recorded as such in the AVconn template at the bottom of the article. I've removed this reference. I've also removed mention of power from the introduction, since they're no longer used for mains power (I don't know how common phantom power is now). Isidore (talk) 08:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
XLR cables are used to supply power to video cameras. It is in carrying power that they are used in video, not in carrying video signal. They also carry audio signal to video cameras, of course, and intercom signals to the camera operator. In these senses, especially power, XLRs are used "in professional audio and video electronics cabling applications". Binksternet (talk) 14:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Better photo?

The current XLR image has poor contrast as wells overshapening artifacts. Could it please be replaced with a better image or diagram?

post a better one here and we'll discuss it. Metal bodied connectors are a HUGE pita to photgraph well because some part of them almost invariblly ends up reflecting the light source directly into the camera. Plugwash 16:13, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I found a better one on Commons. Doesn't show panel-mount though. I might try my hand at it, but not in the next few days...
A diagram showing the pinouts would be good, too. I'm a little confused about the case connection. Is the standard trying to recommend a three-conductor+shielded cable? — Omegatron 01:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History?

Can anyone tell when XLR was invented?

[1] This link from ITT-Cannon is a PDF of XLR products. On page 4 they state that XLR was introduced in 1958. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.170.14 (talk) 09:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


There is now a page with some details about the development of XLR connectors at http://www.soundfirst.com/xlr.html Some of this information could probably be repurposed for this wiki page. --BenFranske (talk) 07:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ray Rayburn's page. He's probably among the top three guys in the world who would know. A very expert source. Binksternet (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

XLR-LNE

I have uploaded picture of a XLR-LNE plug, socket follows shortly --jmb 23:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

XLR-LNE Plug
XLR-LNE Socket
XLR-LNE Socket

(I also have a EP-LNE and EP4 plug in my junk box if pictures wanted for any other articles. Sure I must have one of the old EP4 (socket) mains lead somewhere) --jmb 23:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool. They're a little blurry at the front of the connector, which is the part we want to see. Can you take more? I've found that putting the camera in macro mode and then zooming in all the way works best. Maybe just the plug and socket by themselves without the paper behind? — Omegatron 23:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I will have another try later, trouble is the flash being above the camera tends to not penetrate into the pins. I will get a floodlight out and see if I can some more light with that. --jmb 07:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This one should be better. The trouble with using Macro is that it is difficult to get enough light into the front of the subject. It is easier to get further away and then use zoom. --jmb 08:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
XLR-LNE Plug and Socket
Yeah, my camera can be in macro mode and zoom in all the way, which works best for me. Allows more of it to be in focus.
This version is much better. Thanks. — Omegatron 12:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I found some more XLR connectors in a box of junk so Ihave taken some pictures. Leave someone else to fit on the main page if wanted. I have some XLR3 but you seem to have that covered OK. --jmb 15:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Group of XLR connectors
XLR4 connectors
XLR6 connectors
Excellent! Thanks! — Omegatron 17:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome. -- Ned Scott 20:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a request! You guys takig the photos, great! it helps us all, but PLEASE add something in there for scale (part of tape measure, euro coin, or US quarter, etc there. I have no idea how big or small these things are, come ot WP to learn! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.172.84 (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(→XLR3 connectors - «+"XLR and 1/4' TRS combo jack."» not the best picture of a dark object.

I will see if I can borrow one (after Christmas probably) and take a brighter picture if not been done by then. --jmb 01:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can try to take a better one tomorrow. — Omegatron 02:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signal vs. Chassis Grounds and Cable Shield connections

There seems to be a lot of confusion in the "end user" world about what to look for in XLR cables (as opposed to the XLR connections on equipment, which an "end user" can't practically change.

I added a small reference to that in the main page ... is there another reference that should be put there? Or another Wiki page that could also be referenced? My quick search didn't find one.

Here is a an external link to a longer note I wrote in another Wiki recently Bose Wiki Reference article on technical aspects of XLR cables

DanCornett 17:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

battery charger connector

The XLR is now the standard connector for battery chargers and mobility aid vehicles like wheel chairs and scooters. The female part is on the charger cable and the male part is build into the vehicle. Pin 1 is battery plus, pin 2 battery minus and pin 3 an inhibit signal which prevents the vehicle from driving while the charger is connected. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.33.174.22 (talk) 08:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Pin 1

Deleted:

"Note that neither the standards nor manufacturers agree on the best way to handle the usage of pin 1 at both ends of a cable, particularly with respect to the cable shield, the connector's shell, signal ground, and a third cable wire connected to pin 1 — which may (or may not) be connected to the shield."

Err...third cable wire? Every balanced cable I have has a shield and one twisted pair. Pin 1 in the shield on cables, as specified by AES14-1992. AES48-2005 [2] specifies exactly what to do with it in equipment, and good engineers have known the designs in that standard for decades (for example, the telephone network uses the same principles, runs hundreds of miles, and does not hum). Granted, there is some equipment that gets it wrong, and sometimes the problem can be solved by things like disconnecting pin 1 on one end of the cable, but to say that there is no standard or consensus is misleading and not helpful. How to design audio equipment interconnects and how to solve commonly encountered problems with them is not a topic to be neglected, and if it's to be discussed, I reckon it deserves an article of its own. [3] provides a good overview of the problem. 70.9.137.32 21:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are audio cables with three conductors and a shield, at one time advocated by Neumann to permit the phantom power return current to run on its own conductor rather than the shield (particularly in fixed installations where there was sometimes no drain wire and only a foil shield). This can be a problem because most of the interference rejection of a balanced audio signal occurs by common mode rejection, which requires good balance between the two conductors and ground. It is easier to do that with a 2 or 4 conductor cable rather than 3. I have made some additions to the pin 1 discussion, hopefully it will be a little clearer. AES14, 48 and 54 actually make sense as a system when you understand the problem. Altaphon (talk) 20:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

XLR-3-32 / XLR-3-31 Confusion

Hi I've seen a lot of references to XLR-3-32 and XLR-3-31, but haven't been able to find a definition of what they mean. I have assumed that one is female and the other is male and the 32 and 31 refer to the pinout. If anyone wants to clear this up, I would greatly appreciate it! 74.14.228.158 15:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are ITT Cannon part number detail for panel mount male and female three-contacts. Maybe we can add this link [4]. Other mfgs have equivalent part numbers of course. Meggar 17:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dimensions

Can someone please report the fundamental dimensions [eg. plug diameter, pin spacings & thier diameters, etc etc] of XLR connectors in the article - thank you
--83.105.33.91 15:38, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the drawings with those numbers are part of the IEC standard and subject to copyright. More unfortunately, many of the permissible values are so broad that there are many cases of supposedly intermateable connectors either failing to mate and latch, or being so loose as to rattle. Altaphon (talk) 20:56, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Round or Rubber?

Ray Rayburn says XLR is XL Rubber. User:99.233.87.254, a self-professed former Cannon engineer, says the R is Round. Can someone prove the XLR showed up before it had a rubbery pin strata in the female? Can anyone prove that the XL connector was already round? Either of these cases would go a long way toward settling the matter. Binksternet 05:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. See Ray Rayburn's page. The X and XL connectors are both round. Altaphon (talk) 20:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mnemonics

Does this section really enhance this article? It seems to be a bit close to trivia for my liking (Rexeltw (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC))[reply]

XLR Abbreviation

A google search using 'xternal live return' (XLR) gives many examples where this is taken to be the correct words for the abbreviation. I have also read 'xtra live return' (XLR), but I think this must be wrong, or possibly just not recognised. Personally, I don't think Canon XL with Rubber is correct: perhaps once it was, but no longer is, especially as companies such as Neutrik now use the label XLR. Richard Nowell (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your personal research and opinion. It is in conflict with the exhaustive research done by Ray Rayburn, a Fellow of the Audio Engineering Society. Binksternet (talk) 16:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Settled! As Mr. Rayburn points out, it has become a generic term, which I guess has various 'slang' labels. Perhaps 'xternal, live, return' is an abbreviation that points out what the function of each wire is- possibly for ease-of-use for non-engineers. I was not sure what was meant by the term canon-to-canon, but now I know. Thankyou. Richard Nowell (talk) 12:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

tell

what is long form xlr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.220.143.5 (talk) 10:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no long form, except perhaps Cannon X connector with Latch and Resilient neoprene around the female contacts. Binksternet (talk) 05:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's right. Personally I have never seen Xternal Live Return mentioned before looking at this talk page, and it doesn't appear in any standard I know of on the topic. Altaphon (talk) 20:54, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Parallel powering information

The phantom power section (which appears to be lifted straight from phantom power) says:

This is in marked contrast to another, slightly earlier method of powering known as parallel powering or T-powering (from the German term Tonaderspeisung), in which DC was overlaid directly onto the signal in differential mode. (emphasis mine)

I'm confused how parallel powering is different than phantom power (from a wiring point of view, I don't know what voltage it ran at, nor do I think it matters). Could anyone provide more information (and if so, phantom power should probably be updated first/as well). And since I'm new to adding to discussions, what's the proper way to cross-post (if it is proper) this request to phantom power? Velowiki (talk) 16:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cross posting seems appropriate Talk:Phantom_power#Cross_post_from_XLR_connector. --Kvng (talk) 23:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no expert (who is?) but Phantom power says in part

T-power, also known as A-B powering [5] or 12T, described in DIN 45595, is an alternative to phantom powering that is fading into obsolescence. In this scheme, 12 volts is applied through 180 Ohm resistors between the microphone's "hot" terminal (XLR pin 2) and the microphone's "cold" terminal (XLR pin 3). This results in a 12 volt potential difference with significant current capability across pins 2 and 3, which would likely cause permanent damage if applied to a dynamic or ribbon microphone.

Parallel power ignores the shield. Phantom power the cable shield as the return. --Wtshymanski (talk) 00:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

XLR 6 Differences

  We can see difference between two models of XLR6.Of course you can't replace one by the other.
  For instance,the model for loudspeaker on Turntable EMT 948(pins location is symetric) and the other more recent model with asymetric location of pins.
 I have picture but too difficult to insert.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.221.139.123 (talk) 08:24, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply] 

Robustness

There is no mention in the whole article about one of XLR's most important and distinguishing (say, from USB, heh) properties: its extreme robustness, reliability and quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.196.68 (talk) 23:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pin out incorrect?

As far as I can tell, the pin out diagram is incorrect. The numbering for male and female are reversed. Female XLR plugs are 1-2-3, left-right-bottom and male XLR are 2-1-3. 1 being ground, 2 being hot and 3 cold. This is according to RaneNote 110 (pretty well known sound reinforcement wiring technical document) as well as the diagram on Clark Wire & Cable's website. --CableModem^^ (talk) 12:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that Rane shows the back side of the connector, where the wires are connected (usually by solder). The diagram in the Wikipedia article shows the front side, the mating side. Both are correct. Binksternet (talk) 14:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just confirming that Binksternet is correct--both diagrams reflect what any user would see when observing them from the outside, and for both the cable-end-mounted and the panel-mounted variety. Of course, from the perspective of a repair tech (observing from the inside, where the wires are soldered to the connector) it's exactly what one would--or should--expect to see. This would be a potentially confusing and totally unneccessary bit of trivia, and shouldn't even be included here, if we humans didn't occasionally forget the obvious, or if users never attempted repairing their own gear, but I've done both (long, long ago, of course)...Ob1-kenogle (talk) 05:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]