DIN or RCA phono plug--which is 'better'?

There are many different DIN connectors.

The RCA connector is inherently flawed in that there is no standard i.e. there is no guarantee that a given male will mate snugly with a given female, always a bad thing. There are other connectors that are much better, such as DIN and XLR, but we seem to be stuck with the RCA for single ended equipment. Some manufacturers such as Naim tried to get away from them but it never really caught on. Now Naim equipment comes with DIN and RCA connections.

Thanks, guys. I am asking because KAB has finished DIN
& RCA terminal prototypes for the Technics 1200's tonearm. Can choose either one for my deck. Kevin is offering Cardas Litz for the tonearm rewire, seems the Creature is getting to where it should be...at last!

Next is choosing the phono cable. What a mess!!!!

***

Nsgarch:

I have not been able to find mention of any such connector in either the DIN or JIS standards. Ditto according to my manufacturing sources in Japan (who just call it "tonearm connector").

I believe that it is a misuse of the term. Probably one of those cases where someone calls an item by the wrong name, no qualified individual is available to contest the misinformation, and it spreads into general use. Not so uncommon on the internet.

regards and hth, jonathan carr

Jonathan whatever the cause, please don't blame the internet -- the SME factory has been calling them DIN plugs since 1990 (and probably before):

"The high quality linear crystal oxygen-free copper audio lead selected for its electrical and mechanical characteristics is terminated at one end with SME right-angle 5-pole DIN contra-plug and gold-plated phono plugs at the other."

One would think that in over 16 years, someone would have called them on it, no? Seems weird to me. Also (checking Google) there is no shortage of both manufacturers and distributors of this item who are gleefully referring to it the same way as SME. Surely the DIN people would have made them cease and desist by now, if it were untrue. Are we talking about the same thing?
.

Nsgarch:

I don't work within the EU, so I cannot claim to know the DIN data books inside and out. But I do work with a company who manufactures the actual tonearm connectors (and supplies various tonearm and cable manufacturers with same). Absolutely no mention of "DIN" from these guys. None. From the DIN connector books that I have looked at personally, the tonearm connector does not appear to be covered under DIN. Ditto also for the JIS books.

Now if anyone knows of the specification number for this connector under either the JIS or DIN system, I'd be happy to check it out and verify it.

There is a certain DIN connector specification which if modified, will give you something fairly close to the tonearm connector. I reckon that it is possible that the design of the tonearm connector was partly derived from this DIN connector. But if I recall correctly, although there were similarities, there were also non-trivial differences.

As far as I have seen, the tonearm connector has been in use in tonearms from at least the mid 70s, and may be even older. I have an original FR-64s (an Ikeda design) which has this connector.

BTW, SME does buy some of its componentry from Japan - I thought that they used Ito (who produced the Ittok for Linn). SME could be making the connector themselves, or sourcing it from somewhere in Europe, but it could also be from Japan.

As for challenging people on anything, one has to consider whether it is worth the effort, especially since if it is of no direct benefit to you. And in my case, given the same amount of time and effort, I could certainly be doing other, far more interesting and productive things, like design and development. Beyond a certain point, arguing is a waste of time and boring.

And pragmatically, as long as you're not involved in manufacturing the tonearm connectors or incorporating them into your own arm design, and you (and the people that you talk to) know what kind of thing the DIN / tonearm connector is, maybe that's sufficient.

regards, jonathan carr