Tone arm plug in RCA cable?

Are you looking for a DIN to RCA phono cable instead of the PIB-1 interface box?

pro-ject-connect-it-tonearm-cable

@imhififan well right now it is:

1. DIN —> RCA (into the PIB)
2. PIB —> RCA (PIB to Phono stage.)

The PIB plugs into the tone arm.

But I am going to a new phono stage.

Is there any meaningful sonic advantage in going direct from DIN to phono stage?
(I think in the past it was mostly a PITA to get the cable into the phonostage without jostling the TT.)

Maybe I should just do shorter RCA from PIB to phonostage?

I probably want to understand what the good and not so good DIN to RCA are.
 

\

If you can look at a RCA Phono Cable with PC Triple C wire, this will be a  wire that has a very detectable lucidity and is proving to be improved over OCC wire.

One other wire with a similarity in the detectable lucidity, along with a detectable hint of richness is D.U.C.C, this can be found as a RCA Phono Cable. 

@pindac my lucidity issue is more with what to search for, or product name examples. Maybe I need to try a different search engine.

Get a DIN to RCA and forget about the Sumiko box!

https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/audio/index.htm

SAEC and Audio Technica both use the Wire Types referred to. 

Hi Holmz, I am pretty sure the box only serves as an adaptor, in which case you would be best served by buying a tonearm cable possessing absolutely massive detectable lucidity. At a budget price Mogami, further up Audio Technica, Chord, Cardas, Kimber

What they’re trying to tell you is you don’t need the bleeding box at all. The 5-pin plug that you shove into the base of your tonearm is called a DIN plug. You can buy a single pair of cables with a DIN plug at one end, terminating both channels. Each of the two cables emanating from the DIN will terminate at their other ends in RCAs which you plug into your phono stage directly. 

I NEED a conversion box like that, because I have a mini-din connector out of the back of the arm (mine's above the deck). Thus I have to convert from mini-din to rca, then rca out to the rca Phono inputs. Note: ground connection also needed.

Yours, please clarify:

mini din OR larger standard size DIN connector within/out of the tonearm?

If standard size DIN, then you can skip the conversion box and use a DIN to RCA Phono Cable (with ground wire).

Verify if your tonearm connector is female or male, get opposite din connector on the cable.

Long enough to reach from the arm to your phono stage inputs with a bit of slack for convenience. Anticipate potential relocation when choosing length.

IF you already had an RCA to RCA phono cable you like, or want, you can continue to use the existing conversion box. That's one more connection, however if not noisy now, like mine, not a real issue. 

Talk to AntiCables. They can make any cable with any plug you want even assuming the OP has a miniDIN, whatever that is. It is always beneficial to reduce the number of physical connections in the signal path, noise or no noise.

@lewm 

I could be wrong but I think @holmz want to rewire the PIB-1 stock wire with better cable and looking for recommendations.

Yes, but what I and others are saying is he is better off getting rid of the box entirely.  Just go DIN at the arm base to RCA at the phono stage, which can very easily be achieved and would cost no more than buying RCA to RCA conventional interconnects, wire quality notwithstanding.  If Holmz has a "mini-DIN" connection at the tonearm (suggested by Elliot), which I have never seen, then I am still pretty confident the same idea can be made to work.  I do realize that buying a whole new DIN to RCA IC is going to cost more than just replacing that short run of wire from the DIN plug to the box, but I believe it's a worthy use of $$$.  Otherwise, yes, use "better wire" of choice between DIN and box.  There is some soldering skill and knowledge of what goes where needed to re-wire a DIN plug; paying someone else to do it would negate the cost savings of keeping the box.

@holmz : Please follow the @lewm and other gentleman advise. You don’t need the PIB..

" I need to try a different search engine. "

I think not, what you need is to follow trusty audiophiles that give you " solutions on hand " and stop to follow stupid posts.

R.

If the OP wants to replace the Cable used for the PIB - 1, the method when used will add one more set of connections and disruption in the signal path.

Causing this condition is usually one that is avoided and attempts are made to keep the connections to the minimum required.

If this is the only option the OP is considering, a Pure Copper Zavfino DIN Plug and the Chassis Mount  Pure Copper WBT reduced eddy RCA's will be a good start for the connections.

These parts 'could' be attached to the box, which will remove the need for the length of cable to be utilised. The additional Space that may be required under the TT to achieve this would need to be addressed.

A length of Cable with PC Triple C or D.U.C.C Wire will be a cable worth experiencing, if the Cable has to remain used with the box, either of these Cables will most likely be kept and expanded on in use as umbilical's at other interfaces.       

Pindac, You wrote, "If the OP wants to replace the Cable used for the PIB - 1, the method when used will add one more set of connections and disruption in the signal path."  I beg to differ.  He is already using the box, so changing the wires between the DIN plug and the box will not add physical connectors in the signal path. That will not change.  However, by eliminating the box interface, then he can reduce the existing number of physical connections in the signal path.

I gather you have strong opinions on what kind of wire sounds best.  So do many of us, but I think getting rid of the box is the main thing,

@holmz  : " I have a tone arm with a connector that plugs into the bottom of the arm.."

Which tonearm and which kind of connector it has? for what you posted  the tonearm output connector is a DIN Pin5.

@imhififan ​​​​​@yogiboy  already gave the solution.

" Is there any meaningful sonic advantage in going direct from DIN to phono stage? "

Absolutely, you need to go directly to the phono stage with nothing in between the DIN PIN 5 output connector and the input at PS other that the IC cable that those two gentlemans already posted and gave you the link ! ? ? !!

R.

@lewm makes no sense to follow stupid posts but is up to you.

R.

@holmz : Please follow the @lewm and other gentleman advise. You don’t need the PIB..

 

" I need to try a different search engine. "

 

I think not, what you need is to follow trusty audiophiles that give you " solutions on hand " and stop to follow stupid posts.

 

R.

I can only work with what I have, so if it looks stupid I can only offer and apology as that is as good as it gets. But as I asking,  it appears that I am open to receiving trustworthy advice.

The PIB is as @imhififan posted.

I’ll try an older DIN to RCA I have laying around, and see how it sounds, and then go from there.

Is there any meaningful sonic advantage in going direct from DIN to phono stage?
(I think in the past it was mostly a PITA to get the cable into the phonostage without jostling the TT.)

Theoretically, less break in the signal chain is better and I understand why SOTA turntable user preferred a interface box.

I’ll try an older DIN to RCA I have laying around, and see how it sounds, and then go from there.

IMO, a cable clamp can serve the same purpose as a PIB if using DIN to RCA cable.

Yeah @imhififan My serial number is lot lower, and the PIB is just around the corner (clockwise when looking down.)… other than that, it looks about the same.

You might want to try this tonearm cable Axon 24 Tonearm Cable – Nerve Audio

good quality and reasonably priced.

@holmz 

All the folk who recommend getting rid of the PIB are missing a trick.

Interconnects are far more commonly available to audition than DIN phono cables.

My recommendation is keep the PIB so that you can try different interconnects, and then when you have found the best interconnect, then you can order one with a DIN and remove the PIB.

In other words leaving the PIB enables you to try different interconnects more easily.

@holmz  I think your query has been on how to exchange parts belonging to the Box, especially the wire.

I have suggested a method that can bypass the wire, or to use a wire of a particular type.

Both of these can produce the configuration the box offers and both configurations are available in the Market Place.

As said reducing the amount of connections is most desirable.

There is an advantage to the Box, as there are not a broad selection of DIN>RCA Cables as their are RCA>RCA Cables.

This box will enable the opportunity to experience a broad range of cables over a period of time and assist in your experiencing Cables as an umbilical down stream  from your Analogue Source.

This is how others who I have introduced my cable suggestions to have discovered its value in their systems.

This is now why in these systems there are at present produced Tonearms with PC Triple C now used as internal wiring. 

DIN>RCA PC Triple C Cables purchased and a Phonostage had the internal signal path wiring exchanged to the same material. 

Contempt prior to investigation is a very restrictive place to be.

There is nothing like being curious and inquisitive, it is a great place to be, no matter what the outcome of the experiences undertaken, for others the healthy disposition has proved to be the mother of invention. 

Alternatively there are other suggestions being offered, that from some will potentially end up with you being informed of needing dump your equipment and spend thousands $$$$$, always easy when it is others money.     

Contempt prior to investigation is a very restrictive place to be.

There is nothing like being curious and inquisitive, it is a great place to be, no matter what the outcome of the experiences undertaken, for others the healthy disposition has proved to be the mother of invention. 

I think I am still curious.

You might want to try this tonearm cable Axon 24 Tonearm Cable – Nerve Audio

good quality and reasonably priced.

Thanks for that example.

@rauliruegas , you are right. This is a stupid thread. 

@rauliruegas , you are right. This is a stupid thread. 

I cannot argue cogently that it is not a stupid thread.

But I have been, and am, generally remote in the sense of getting to shops and staying abreast of things.
(Sorry for being a bore.)

@mijostyn,

I have a similar problem as the OP. I have a older Sota tt with the PIB block and the DIN plug and wire looks a little long in the tooth, not to mention dated. I am using a older Purist Audio Aqueous Aerious phono cable, RCA to RCA connected to the PIB and phono pre. I don't believe this to be the best connection to my Sota tt. What would you recommend? 

Zavfino gets my vote also - here are their offerings

https://zavfinousa.com/collections/tonearm-cables

Regards - Steve

Holm-zie baby, Your options have been stated over and over again.  They range from (1) changing the wire between the DIN plug and the box, which was your original question to (2) changing the wires and then experimenting with different ICs to find out what ICs between box and phono stage sound best to you (Dover's idea). Then you could purchase a DIN to RCA IC to replace the box.  To (3) ditch the box and just buy a good quality DIN to RCA IC to go from tonearm to phono stage.  There are no other possible answers, no matter how many audiophile websites you may query.  Choose one and good luck.

Raul and Mijostyn do have a point; the thread got stupid when we started going round and round over the same limited number of choices. That is in part because you have acted like none of the responses are helpful, enough. If you want a different response, ask a different question.

@holmz I am a regular forum visitor and contributor to a selection of posts on the analogue section, your inquiry has been welcome and has also encouraged another forum visitor to make their own inquiry on a similar situation.

Your use of this device is not stupid, and any suggestion that promotes the idea that to assist you with your inquiry as being stupid is not helpful to your inquiry.

Valuable Lessons are learnt from experiences encountered in HiFi, maybe the use of the intermediate box in the Signal Path is one that you are yet to assess and evaluate for its impact on the Sound Quality that is being produced.

Maybe this thread is a stimulus to trial the options suggested and select the one that is the most attractive to you.

Either way, the choices you are contemplating working with or are to make, along with the inquiry of this thread are not stupid.

I have seen a few contributions that are food for thought as the inquisitiveness grows.  

" Your use of this device is not stupid.." certainly not. You are.

R.

Well I appreciate the responses none the less.
And the specific examples (like the Zavfino.)

Thanks guys.

Let stirring up the pot😁

Another option

Tonearm Cable (TAC) Adaptor

Option 2

Rewire the tonearm and extend the wire to a junction box ( PIB ), so OP can try different ICs.

Option 3

Rewire the tonearm with RCA cable.

Looks like a certain forum contributor is 'wed' to referring to other members as being 'stupid' hopefully this short lived and is only a passing trend/fad.

I think this is possible, as the certain forum member, did refrain from informing the OP in this thread, to Dump their equipment and spend thousands $$$$$ on the barrage of purchase links subsequently supplied.  This usual 'wed' to attitude appears to have been a fad, I hope as they have discovered the approach is not abe to be taken serious and is laughable, or is this different approach only limited to this thread?    

It is not really considerate to the OP, or contributors who have offered support,  that the raised Thread is contaminated with unhelpful moments, that are of a content that is attacking the contributions offered,  especially attacks of the type that are bullying and intended to discourage further input.

@imhififan a good selection of photo suggestions to help the OP see further considerations. 

I am with you on option 3, the OP is hopefully still enjoying the assessment of what can be achieved with the options outlined.         

@imhififan thanks for those examples. In the last “option 3” example:

1. Does one use a specific type of wire? (Like a specific thin silver?)
2. Which company peddles the DIN plugs ?

@pindac it appears like might be in the same boat, if one those IQ denigrations were aimed your way. (But I feel more like Gillian, rather than Thurston Howell III, or the Professor.)

@holmz a Pure Copper Zavfino DIN Plug and the Chassis Mount  Pure Copper WBT reduced eddy RCA's will be a good start for the connections.

There are already links to Zavfino in other posts. 

The Jury is out on Copper vs Silver, I have used OFC Copper Cables in the early 00's  and exchanged all Cables to OCC Copper and Silver over the course of New Millennium.   

In the past few years I have been exchanging to CCC Copper and D.U.C.C Copper Cables from Power Cable through to Speaker.

After the impression made during a recent Tonearm demonstration, I will soon have a Tonearm Internal Wiring in CCC as well.

SAEC are unique in using the same wire type  in a commercial product, and it can be found used in their $13000 Tonearm Model. 

Both myself and a friend now know why SAEC chose this wire, out of the numerous other choices for them to select. 

SAEC are unique in using the same wire type  in a commercial product, and it can be found used in their $13000 Tonearm Model. 

Both myself and a friend now know why SAEC chose this wire, out of the numerous other choices for them to select

You and your friend sound smart.
 

 

@holmz a Pure Copper Zavfino DIN Plug and the Chassis Mount  Pure Copper WBT reduced eddy RCA's will be a good start for the connections.

I’d be stupid not to follow this route. 

Thanks @pindac 

SAEC, the company known for tonearms, has been out of the business during most of the most modern era of obsessive copper wire-naming and the wild claims associated with that practice.

Dear @holmz  : " You and your friend sound smart. "

Well due that your analog knowledge level is so low for you " sound smart " but it's the other way around because no one audiophile with good knowledge level will choose SAEC tonearm with that " terrible " double knife bearing design, other than unipivots the worst tonearm bearing to mount any cartridge. I owned the 8000, 506 and 407 models that were the top in the SAEC line.

Obviously that you need to learn and as a fact you are learning but take care because not all what " shines " is  " gold " as those two gentlemans with SAEC tonearms. To each his own.

About zavfino items you are not stupid about but you really don't read carefully what people posted because zavfino not only appeared in this thread but in other of your threads. You need to stay in focus for you can really learn. Only an opinion.

R.

 @rauliruegas I’ll search those Zavfino threads out.
Thanks for mentioning it, as I would not have considered it.

@holmz I hope you are not feeling you need to be acquiring cryptic information concealed from the world, where only certain code breakers are able to discover the relics that have the inscribed ancient text needing to be deciphered to allow entry into the secret society of the Audiophile.

I do believe there is a minority that are infiltrated into forums, that are in search of this type of fantasy, but their misguided approach has them obsessing over anything but the actual replay of a music.

The really noticeable and outstanding trait, is that there is no fun in that place, life is hurtling by, and the joy of living is being passed by, with a head full of confusion and discontentment.

An Audiophile enjoys the moment when encountering music and equipment used for sound reproduction. 'ENJOYS' being the key word, I have met hundreds, they are a pleasure to be around.

@holmz You have been informed that your analogue knowledge is ’so low’ by a person who made the following statement:

when SME ( that knows everything you can imagine on tonearmTTs. )

Well SME have a history of producing Knife Edge Bearing Designs, they probably sold in 10’s of 1000’s and guess what, all were most likely really ’ENJOYED’ by their owners, and I will even go out on a limb and suggest a large selection of individuals still ’ENJOY’ them today as being equipment used for sound reproduction.

Interesting SAEC and Jelco have a similar design for their models and I know from many different observations, these are models that are with their own following and I will go out on a limb and suggest a large selection of individuals still ’ENJOY’ them today as being equipment used for sound reproduction.

Zavfino is a Brand that is well respected and there has been advisories offer to look this way, but I am sure you were en-route, there has been a lot to sift through.

The following is the statement in the previous post:

About zavfino items you are not stupid

When you get the time to visit the Zavfino Site and look at their devices, have a look at their Aeshna Tonearm, it is a Knife Edge Bearing Design, I think this will be quite interesting to you, you might even wonder why a Company renowned for their Tonearm Ancillaries would opt for this design.

Have a look at the Link, you might even wonder why SAEC would opt for this design.

The usual method - right click on the page and choose Translate in the toolbar.

The product summary will be of interest.

Well SME have a history of producing Knife Edge Bearing Designs, they probably sold in 10’s of 1000’s and guess what, all were most likely really ’ENJOYED’ by their owners, and I will even go out on a limb and suggest a large selection of individuals still ’ENJOY’ them today as being equipment used for sound reproduction.

OK

Well due that your analog knowledge level is so low for you " sound smart " but it's the other way around because no one audiophile with good knowledge level will choose SAEC tonearm with that " terrible " double knife bearing design, other than unipivots the worst tonearm bearing to mount any cartridge. I owned the 8000, 506 and 407 models that were the top in the SAEC line.

Well I choose it in ~84, as that was when the TT was bought and set up. So it is not like I found one on the side of the road, and thought “that’ll do”.
It was more at the time the dealer said, “that’ll do”.

If I knew what to listen for, and when the knife-edge bearing would be making chattering noises, then maybe I would be able to hear the flaw. But it seems to sound pretty good. I do have a test record coming in the mail, so I’ll see what it reveals. That gives me some time, as the whole bevy of arms is a lot to go through.

Other than effective mass, and what cartridges can work… there is also what fits on the TT… and from that list is I suppose tracking error and maybe rumble/chatter as objective things.
But what subjective things should be evident in a cheap old SAEC arm (like mine) that I should be listening for?

@holmz  : OK? really. 

Holmz when SME took in count its mistake with the knife bearing switched at once for the great SME V till today. Jelco was in the rigth " road " and now is in the knife bearing tonearm worst mistake. To each his own.

R.

There are individuals on forums that are afflicted with such obsessional dispositions, their need to enforce their fantasies about designs and products are at risk of becoming a very misguided garble and will ultimately end up with an individual who has sought a guidance receiving mis-information.

The Link will give a better description on how SME were looking at their designs for their Tonearm Models, along with how it received as a product throughout the world. That is a better overview, than the very obscured and narrow focused view of your other source of information. 

As a summary, of the Link, I do not see anywhere within it that makes the SME look like a design as corrective measure to a mistake to swept under the carpet.

More like they revered the design and continued with it comfortably into the New Millennium.

Under the present guidance you are receiving from the terminally obsessed type of forum contributor, it will not be long, especially once they have made their new discovery, that they will be telling forum members the SME V is mistake to be abandoned, as the Wand is inferior and is now superseded, as SME have chose to use a secret material that is a compound of plastics/resins to produce a composite wand.

https://www.tonepublications.com/old-school/sme-3009-tonearm/#:~:text=Founded%20in%201946%20by%20Robertson,in%20the%20autumn%20of%201958.

In the last “option 3” example:

1. Does one use a specific type of wire? (Like a specific thin silver?)
2. Which company peddles the DIN plugs ?

This is the link:

decibelhifi.com.au

They should be able to answer your questions.

This is the link:

decibelhifi.com.au

They should be able to answer your questions

Yeah I did see that right before this:

SAEC are unique in using the same wire type  in a commercial product, and it can be found used in their $13000 Tonearm Model. 

@holmz  : OK? really. 

Holmz when SME took in count its mistake with the knife bearing switched at once for the great SME V till today. Jelco was in the rigth " road " and now is in the knife bearing tonearm worst mistake. To each his own

Yeah really.

I am not sure how many times I can ask what is wrong with the SAEC in terms of how a knife edge affects the sound.

I know you think it is the worse (or next to unipivot), but I do not appreciate what that means in terms of the way it sounds, or how I could tell other than reading that it sucks..

I feel the need to correct an earlier statement made about the Success of the SME Knife Edge Bearing, my prediction of 10's of 1000's is quite short the following is official: 

Official Factory Production Statistics

Series I: 1959-1963, approximately 10,000 built

Series II: 1963-1973, approximately 180,000 built

Series II Improved: 1973-2003, 260,484 built

  This Link has loaded better, it is best available to be read with an easy access.

There are Two accounts within this Thread, one from the attached link and one from a earlier post, that have content referring to the SME mindset for their Knife Edge Designs.

As these accounts are Polar Opposites, it is looking like One Account is with a content that is utter BS and has only been supplied to attempt to Bully an individual into a submission and acceptance of a incorrect statement.

My assessment is that the link is containing very accurate information.

https://www.tonepublications.com/old-school/sme-3009-tonearm/

rauliruegas

11,485 posts

03-29-2022 at 03:09pm 

 

" Your use of this device is not stupid.." certainly not. You are."

@holmz  : Again you don't read carefully. The knife problem was already explained in your threads by mijostyn and Dr, S.Win. but if that is what you like fine because who have to be satisfied is you not me.

R.