Total Members Voted: 14
Voting closed: 11 Dec 2003, 11:38 am
The main issue would come from the rear panel of a lot of AV receivers and HT processors. There are so many inputs/outputs jammed into the back, and I think making them all BNC would make it incredibly hard for anyone who has a lot of AV sources. And are you considering "transition costs" in this poll? (ie. we'd all have to spend money on getting our cables re-terminated!)
Hi Phill,Considering the size of the current "high end" ICs I think the BNC would offer a space advantage, not a disadvantage. However you are right this would be an HUGE change. Which is why I suggested the BNC to RCA adapters.Regards,Bill
I don't think moving to BNC would do anything to change the size of current "high end" ICs, would it? But I was also thinking more that the BNC locking mechanism takes up more space than a typical RCA, so AV receiver/processor manufacturers would be challenged with spacing of the terminals in a way that would (a) have everything fit, and (b) have enough space to make locking/unlocking them easy.Btw - I run Audience Au24 cables throughout my rig...and they are really slim and tiny. I had forgotten how ...
Like PhilNYC, I use Audience cables so spacing is not a problem. Second,I think AES balanced XLR digital cables are the way to go.If your digital equipment supports AES, get a male & female XLR plug andmake your own digital IC with a single twisted pair from some Cat5e cable. Just connect the +/- pins 2&3. Cost should be <$10., and compare it to the StereoVOX HDXV BNC. For speaker connections I prefer bare wires, but if you want to replace bananas & spades, my vote is for the Neutrik Speakon. Easy to termnateand biwire ready.
it would be ok for ic but not for speakers.... the size of many speaker cables would not work with a bnc connector..... additionally, it is not a good idea to mix line level connectors with speaker level connector ...