After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the lounge
floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point where the
speakers are.

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution which
also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for short or long
periods.

As far as I can see the best thing is to have connectors in the floor.
However making them unobtrusive is the challenge.
Most recessed solutions seem to rely on a flip up cover for when the
speaker is in use.
This is too obtrusive as the speakers will be wired in for extended
periods.

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.

Anyway,
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/
look to offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look
when not in use.
They are a bit expensive, though, at over £3 a pop.
I anticipate needing:
two for each rear surround speaker (4 total)
four for each main front speaker for bi-wire (8 total)
In the great scheme of things £36-£40 isn't that much but these seem a bit
more expensive than other RCA panel mounts (is this because the supplier
is RS?).

I don't have to be as discreet for the other end as all the wiring will be
hidden behind the AV equipment.

So can anyone suggest a similar socket which is a little cheaper?

Cheers


Dave R


--
Windows 8.1 on PCSpecialist box

On 16 Nov 2014, David grunted:

After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the
lounge floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point
where the speakers are.

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution
which also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for
short or long periods.

I've just ordered a batch of these:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/131293712323?

Not arrived yet (3 weeks delivery from China) so can't tell you about the
quality. They look neat to me though, as they are not only flush-fitting,
but the binding posts are recessed within the fitting too.

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 17:26:41 +0000, Lobster wrote:

On 16 Nov 2014, David grunted:

After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the lounge
floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point where
the speakers are.

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution
which also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for short
or long periods.

I've just ordered a batch of these:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/131293712323?

Not arrived yet (3 weeks delivery from China) so can't tell you about
the quality. They look neat to me though, as they are not only
flush-fitting,
but the binding posts are recessed within the fitting too.

Thanks - I'm trying to avoid putting a 1 gang box in the floor because
that seems far more intrusive than just fitting RCA sockets directly into
the wood.

Memo to self - check the maximum thickness of panel that the sockets can
fit into!

Cheers

Dave R

--
Windows 8.1 on PCSpecialist box

On 16 Nov 2014, David grunted:

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 17:26:41 +0000, Lobster wrote:

On 16 Nov 2014, David grunted:

After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the
lounge floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the
point where the speakers are.

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution
which also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for
short or long periods.

I've just ordered a batch of these:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/131293712323?

Not arrived yet (3 weeks delivery from China) so can't tell you about
the quality. They look neat to me though, as they are not only
flush-fitting,
but the binding posts are recessed within the fitting too.

Thanks - I'm trying to avoid putting a 1 gang box in the floor because
that seems far more intrusive than just fitting RCA sockets directly
into the wood.

So it does have to be in the floor though? (mine will be in the wall
like a 13A soccket, with the cables chased into the plaster

--
David

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 18:36:50 +0000, Lobster wrote:

On 16 Nov 2014, David grunted:

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 17:26:41 +0000, Lobster wrote:

On 16 Nov 2014, David grunted:

After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the
lounge floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point
where the speakers are.

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution
which also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for
short or long periods.

I've just ordered a batch of these:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/131293712323?

Not arrived yet (3 weeks delivery from China) so can't tell you about
the quality. They look neat to me though, as they are not only
flush-fitting,
but the binding posts are recessed within the fitting too.

Thanks - I'm trying to avoid putting a 1 gang box in the floor because
that seems far more intrusive than just fitting RCA sockets directly
into the wood.

So it does have to be in the floor though? (mine will be in the wall
like a 13A soccket, with the cables chased into the plaster

Box in the wall is the last resort and I really, really don't want to do
it.
The room is newly plastered and I don't want to start hacking it about
already.
I am now considering putting RCA sockets in the skirting board instead of
the floor, but again it would be a "panel mount" to minimise the impact.

Cheers

Dave R

--
Windows 8.1 on PCSpecialist box

On 16 Nov 2014 16:25:49 GMT, David wrote:

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.

I'd not use RCA (aka phono) for speakers, they probably have high
enough current rating but it'll far to easy misconnect an amplifier
output to an input... Personally I'd use female XLR's with dust
cover, still a bit proud but not a lot. But fail badly on the cheap
part of your spec.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 4:25:52 PM UTC, David wrote:
After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the lounge
floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point where the
speakers are.
I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution which
also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for short or long
periods.
As far as I can see the best thing is to have connectors in the floor.
However making them unobtrusive is the challenge.
Most recessed solutions seem to rely on a flip up cover for when the
speaker is in use.
This is too obtrusive as the speakers will be wired in for extended
periods.
The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.
Anyway,
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/
look to offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look
when not in use.
They are a bit expensive, though, at over £3 a pop.
I anticipate needing:
two for each rear surround speaker (4 total)
four for each main front speaker for bi-wire (8 total)
In the great scheme of things £36-£40 isn't that much but these seem a bit
more expensive than other RCA panel mounts (is this because the supplier
is RS?).
I don't have to be as discreet for the other end as all the wiring will be
hidden behind the AV equipment.
So can anyone suggest a similar socket which is a little cheaper?
Cheers
Dave R

I'd consider putting 4mm banana sockets into the skirting, such that the front of the skt is flush with the front of the skirting.

If you solder, another possible is simply a flush wire loop in the floorboard. Drill 2mm holes down thru the board, and slice out a 2mm groove between them. Loop cable through, solder behind. Cheap, flush, minimal visual impact, no dust trap. Place them close to the wall to avoid damage.


NT

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 8:49:37 PM UTC, wrote:
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 4:25:52 PM UTC, David wrote:
After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the lounge
floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point where the
speakers are.
I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution which
also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for short or long
periods.
As far as I can see the best thing is to have connectors in the floor.
However making them unobtrusive is the challenge.
Most recessed solutions seem to rely on a flip up cover for when the
speaker is in use.
This is too obtrusive as the speakers will be wired in for extended
periods.
The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.
Anyway,
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/
look to offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look
when not in use.
They are a bit expensive, though, at over £3 a pop.
I anticipate needing:
two for each rear surround speaker (4 total)
four for each main front speaker for bi-wire (8 total)
In the great scheme of things £36-£40 isn't that much but these seem a bit
more expensive than other RCA panel mounts (is this because the supplier
is RS?).
I don't have to be as discreet for the other end as all the wiring will be
hidden behind the AV equipment.
So can anyone suggest a similar socket which is a little cheaper?
Cheers
Dave R

I'd consider putting 4mm banana sockets into the skirting, such that the front of the skt is flush with the front of the skirting.

If you solder, another possible is simply a flush wire loop in the floorboard. Drill 2mm holes down thru the board, and slice out a 2mm groove between them. Loop cable through, solder behind. Cheap, flush, minimal visual impact, no dust trap. Place them close to the wall to avoid damage.


NT

quarter inch jack sockets?

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 4:25:52 PM UTC, David wrote:
After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the lounge
floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point where the
speakers are.

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution which
also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for short or long
periods.

As far as I can see the best thing is to have connectors in the floor.
However making them unobtrusive is the challenge.
Most recessed solutions seem to rely on a flip up cover for when the
speaker is in use.
This is too obtrusive as the speakers will be wired in for extended
periods.

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.

Anyway,
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/
look to offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look
when not in use.
They are a bit expensive, though, at over £3 a pop.
I anticipate needing:
two for each rear surround speaker (4 total)
four for each main front speaker for bi-wire (8 total)
In the great scheme of things £36-£40 isn't that much but these seem a bit
more expensive than other RCA panel mounts (is this because the supplier
is RS?).

I don't have to be as discreet for the other end as all the wiring will be
hidden behind the AV equipment.

So can anyone suggest a similar socket which is a little cheaper?

Cheers


Dave R


--
Windows 8.1 on PCSpecialist box

Three pound a pop is pretty low cost,,

For myself,, why go to the trouble of
discrete wiring and then skimp on the connectors,,

i used to have beefy wires for audio,
spent a long time playing about with
audio note silver solder and stuff like that,,

I was surprised to find audio note silver spades were so cheap.

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround sound..
Its hard to beat your price cept by drilling a hole and twiddling the wires together,, solder them together ,, is there a carpet..?

You can get tiny little dolls house connectors,,
Simple fact is that speakers come with wires,,
hard to avoid really,, I like chunky wires,
though simple thirteen amp cable will do..

Some audiofile floor connectors are a hunnerper pop..

but well ..
are these worth a look,,for your needs.

CONNFLY DS1002-03-1*2131 £0.o8p

http://www.tme.eu/en/details/zl307-1...02-03-1_2131/#

...

or maybe if you were to splash out,,
Waterproof ones..

http://www.force4.co.uk/department/e...l#.VGkOvmfVI40

///////////

David wrote:

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution which
also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for short or long
periods.

If you want to mount sockets on the floor I'd think it was important to
use sockets that won't be damaged if they are knocked or kicked. How
about flush DIN sockets? They are robust and have a very low profile.

Bill

On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:55:28 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround sound..

That depends on the system. The "5" channels of 5.1 are full range,
full power channels, so in a decent system you ought to be looking at
100W each. This needs a decent bit of copper between the amp and
speakers, 2.5 mm^2 plus, "bell wire" doesn't cut it. The .1 is band
limited, rolls off above around 100 Hz, but as it's the LFE (Low
Frequency Effects) also need a fair bit of omph. Also note that the
only signal in the LFE are the effects bangs, booms, earthquake
simulation... etc.

Having said that most domestic "5.1" systems use tiddly little
satelite speakers for the 5 and cross over with the single low
frequency speaker at maybe 250 Hz. As the tiddly speakers don't need
to shift great amounts of air they can be relatively low power so
using "bell wire" is less of a problem.

I like chunky wires, though simple thirteen amp cable will do..

Aye, making sure there is a good low impedance path between speakers
and amp is one way of cheaply improving a system, particulary the LF.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice writes
On 16 Nov 2014 16:25:49 GMT, David wrote:

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.

I'd not use RCA (aka phono) for speakers, they probably have high
enough current rating but it'll far to easy misconnect an amplifier
output to an input... Personally I'd use female XLR's with dust
cover, still a bit proud but not a lot. But fail badly on the cheap
part of your spec.

Oh, I dunno, these are pretty cheap:

http://cpc.farnell.com/AV15046

http://cpc.farnell.com/AV15042

Ok, the latch is a little proud but it could be removed if required.

--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 8:55:33 PM UTC, wrote:

but well ..
are these worth a look,,for your needs.
CONNFLY DS1002-03-1*2131 £0.o8p
http://www.tme.eu/en/details/zl307-1...02-03-1_2131/#
..
or maybe if you were to splash out,,
Waterproof ones..
http://www.force4.co.uk/department/e...l#.VGkOvmfVI40

Neither is suitable imho


NT

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 10:09:18 PM UTC, wrote:
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 8:55:33 PM UTC, wrote:

but well ..
are these worth a look,,for your needs.
CONNFLY DS1002-03-1*2131 £0.o8p
http://www.tme.eu/en/details/zl307-1...02-03-1_2131/#
..
or maybe if you were to splash out,,
Waterproof ones..
http://www.force4.co.uk/department/e...l#.VGkOvmfVI40

Neither is suitable imho


NT

Goan and beat it for three quid..

I would not choose them either,,

the poster says he wants cheap as chips
or invisible wiring,,

///

I have cheap creative labs speakers connected to my pc
by little more than bell wire,,
with Xonar d2 audio card..

wont knock your pants off but sounds pretty good to me,,

Cept, tube dont always let me play without interruptions..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyVDUVJvDlM

.....

In article , fred scribeth thus
In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice writes
On 16 Nov 2014 16:25:49 GMT, David wrote:

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.

I'd not use RCA (aka phono) for speakers, they probably have high
enough current rating but it'll far to easy misconnect an amplifier
output to an input... Personally I'd use female XLR's with dust
cover, still a bit proud but not a lot. But fail badly on the cheap
part of your spec.

Oh, I dunno, these are pretty cheap:


And decent Neutrik and Amphenol ones aren't much more than that, and are
around the most bomb proof connectors around..


http://cpc.farnell.com/AV15046

http://cpc.farnell.com/AV15042

Ok, the latch is a little proud but it could be removed if required.


--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
scribeth thus
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 10:09:18 PM UTC, wrote:
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 8:55:33 PM UTC, wrote:

but well ..
are these worth a look,,for your needs.
CONNFLY DS1002-03-1*2131 £0.o8p
http://www.tme.eu/en/details/zl307-1...002-03-1_2131/
#
..
or maybe if you were to splash out,,
Waterproof ones..
http://www.force4.co.uk/department/e...-sockets-deck-
glands/force-4-2-pin-5-amp-waterproof-plug-socket.html#.VGkOvmfVI40

Neither is suitable imho


NT

Goan and beat it for three quid..

I would not choose them either,,

the poster says he wants cheap as chips
or invisible wiring,,

///

I have cheap creative labs speakers connected to my pc
by little more than bell wire,,
with Xonar d2 audio card..

wont knock your pants off but sounds pretty good to me,,

Seems a waste of a very good card on speakers like that;!..

Cept, tube dont always let me play without interruptions..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyVDUVJvDlM

....






--
Tony Sayer

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 10:28:53 PM UTC, wrote:
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 10:09:18 PM UTC, wrote:
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 8:55:33 PM UTC, wrote:

are these worth a look,,for your needs.
CONNFLY DS1002-03-1*2131 £0.o8p
http://www.tme.eu/en/details/zl307-1...02-03-1_2131/#
..
or maybe if you were to splash out,,
Waterproof ones..
http://www.force4.co.uk/department/e...l#.VGkOvmfVI40

Neither is suitable imho

Goan and beat it for three quid..

flush mounted banana sockets


NT

On 16/11/2014 21:40, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:55:28 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround sound..

That depends on the system. The "5" channels of 5.1 are full range,
full power channels, so in a decent system you ought to be looking at
100W each. This needs a decent bit of copper between the amp and
speakers, 2.5 mm^2 plus, "bell wire" doesn't cut it. The .1 is band
limited, rolls off above around 100 Hz, but as it's the LFE (Low
Frequency Effects) also need a fair bit of omph. Also note that the
only signal in the LFE are the effects bangs, booms, earthquake
simulation... etc.



76 strand cable is the product to consider:

http://www.screwfix.com/p/flat-speak...0m-white/69746

(Not recommending the source, just showing the cable.)


--
Michael Chare

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 01:06:01 +0000, Michael Chare wrote:

On 16/11/2014 21:40, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 12:55:28 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround sound..

That depends on the system. The "5" channels of 5.1 are full range,
full power channels, so in a decent system you ought to be looking at
100W each. This needs a decent bit of copper between the amp and
speakers, 2.5 mm^2 plus, "bell wire" doesn't cut it. The .1 is band
limited, rolls off above around 100 Hz, but as it's the LFE (Low
Frequency Effects) also need a fair bit of omph. Also note that the
only signal in the LFE are the effects bangs, booms, earthquake
simulation... etc.



76 strand cable is the product to consider:

http://www.screwfix.com/p/flat-speak...2-strand-100m-
white/69746

(Not recommending the source, just showing the cable.)

http://www.russandrews.com/product.asp?
lookup=1&region=UK&currency=GBP&pf_id=3378&custome r_id=PAA1775117914083TSBNHHLPOZNWMBFP




--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £30a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

A lot of people seem to use Banana sockets, so you can do the phasing etc.
There used to be some that mounted without a front lip, but I've not seen
them in years. You needed a recessed hole for the nut.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"David" wrote in message
...
After a long delay I am finally getting rolling on replacing the lounge
floor, including running speaker cable underneath to the point where the
speakers are.

I am still struggling with how to make a permanent cabling solution which
also allows the removal and replacement of the speakers for short or long
periods.

As far as I can see the best thing is to have connectors in the floor.
However making them unobtrusive is the challenge.
Most recessed solutions seem to rely on a flip up cover for when the
speaker is in use.
This is too obtrusive as the speakers will be wired in for extended
periods.

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.

Anyway,
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/
look to offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look
when not in use.
They are a bit expensive, though, at over £3 a pop.
I anticipate needing:
two for each rear surround speaker (4 total)
four for each main front speaker for bi-wire (8 total)
In the great scheme of things £36-£40 isn't that much but these seem a bit
more expensive than other RCA panel mounts (is this because the supplier
is RS?).

I don't have to be as discreet for the other end as all the wiring will be
hidden behind the AV equipment.

So can anyone suggest a similar socket which is a little cheaper?

Cheers


Dave R


--
Windows 8.1 on PCSpecialist box

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 01:06:01 +0000, Michael Chare wrote:

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround
sound..

That depends on the system. The "5" channels of 5.1 are full
range,
full power channels, so in a decent system you ought to be looking
at
100W each. This needs a decent bit of copper between the amp and
speakers, 2.5 mm^2 plus, "bell wire" doesn't cut it. The .1 is
band
limited, rolls off above around 100 Hz, but as it's the LFE (Low
Frequency Effects) also need a fair bit of omph. Also note that
the
only signal in the LFE are the effects bangs, booms, earthquake
simulation... etc.

76 strand cable is the product to consider:

A step up from the "bell wire" normally supplied and probably OK for
most domestic 5.1 setups with tiddly speakers.

A proper system using full range and full power speakers for the
LCRLrRr needs something a bit more substantial. In a fair bit of
fiddling about in the past the *one* thing that made a real audible
improvement in the system I had was changing the speaker cables from
76 stand to 1024 strand 2.5 mm^2. Really improved the LF, due to
better electrical damping of the speakers with the lower impedance
connection.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 09:25:54 +0000, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 01:06:01 +0000, Michael Chare wrote:

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround
sound..

That depends on the system. The "5" channels of 5.1 are full
range,
full power channels, so in a decent system you ought to be looking
at
100W each. This needs a decent bit of copper between the amp and
speakers, 2.5 mm^2 plus, "bell wire" doesn't cut it. The .1 is
band
limited, rolls off above around 100 Hz, but as it's the LFE (Low
Frequency Effects) also need a fair bit of omph. Also note that
the
only signal in the LFE are the effects bangs, booms, earthquake
simulation... etc.

76 strand cable is the product to consider:

A step up from the "bell wire" normally supplied and probably OK for
most domestic 5.1 setups with tiddly speakers.

A proper system using full range and full power speakers for the LCRLrRr
needs something a bit more substantial. In a fair bit of fiddling about
in the past the *one* thing that made a real audible improvement in the
system I had was changing the speaker cables from 76 stand to 1024
strand 2.5 mm^2. Really improved the LF, due to better electrical
damping of the speakers with the lower impedance connection.

Any recommendations as to a supplier of speaker cable?

For some reason the Labgear brand immediately makes me think "over priced".

The cable I need is for the rear speakers but they are fairly meaty.
Mission 77DS.

I will re-use the front speaker cables as they are very meaty.
The previous rear speaker cables were close to bell wire.

Cheers

Dave R

--
Windows 8.1 on PCSpecialist box

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:46:42 +0000, David wrote:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 09:25:54 +0000, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 01:06:01 +0000, Michael Chare wrote:

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround
sound..

That depends on the system. The "5" channels of 5.1 are full
range,
full power channels, so in a decent system you ought to be looking
at
100W each. This needs a decent bit of copper between the amp and
speakers, 2.5 mm^2 plus, "bell wire" doesn't cut it. The .1 is
band
limited, rolls off above around 100 Hz, but as it's the LFE (Low
Frequency Effects) also need a fair bit of omph. Also note that
the
only signal in the LFE are the effects bangs, booms, earthquake
simulation... etc.

76 strand cable is the product to consider:

A step up from the "bell wire" normally supplied and probably OK for
most domestic 5.1 setups with tiddly speakers.

A proper system using full range and full power speakers for the
LCRLrRr needs something a bit more substantial. In a fair bit of
fiddling about in the past the *one* thing that made a real audible
improvement in the system I had was changing the speaker cables from 76
stand to 1024 strand 2.5 mm^2. Really improved the LF, due to better
electrical damping of the speakers with the lower impedance connection.

Any recommendations as to a supplier of speaker cable?

For some reason the Labgear brand immediately makes me think "over
priced".

How about
http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/CASPEAK79.html
looks to be as good a spec and £33.00 (+VAT) per 100M instead of £55.29
per 100M.

Comes in at £44.59 including VAT and delivery.


--
Windows 8.1 on PCSpecialist box

In article ,
David wrote:
The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.

Anyway, http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/ look to
offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look when
not in use.

Those are phono sockets in an XLR frame. Phonos are designed for line
level - not speaker - connections. Phono leads use very thin cable which
isn't what's needed for relatively high current speaker circuits

--
*If only you'd use your powers for good instead of evil.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:13:06 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
David wrote:

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.
Anyway, http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/ look to
offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look when
not in use.

Those are phono sockets in an XLR frame. Phonos are designed for line
level - not speaker - connections.

Yes, but work fine with speakers.

Phono leads use very thin cable which
isn't what's needed for relatively high current speaker circuits

Indeed, hopefully no-one is fool enough to use those.


NT

In article ,
wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:13:06 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
David wrote:

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets
look good but they are proud of the floor. If they are recessed, of
course, they are dust traps. Anyway,
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/ look to
offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look
when not in use.

Those are phono sockets in an XLR frame. Phonos are designed for line
level - not speaker - connections.

Yes, but work fine with speakers.

I'll take your word for it. But sticking up out of the floor? Doubt they'd
stand being whacked with the Hoover.

Phono leads use very thin cable which
isn't what's needed for relatively high current speaker circuits

Indeed, hopefully no-one is fool enough to use those.

Can't see any reason to use a connector not designed for the job when
there is a big variety of ones which are.


NT

--
*It's this dirty because I washed it with your wife's knickers*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, November 17, 2014 6:20:23 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:13:06 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
David wrote:
The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets
look good but they are proud of the floor. If they are recessed, of
course, they are dust traps. Anyway,
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/ look to
offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look
when not in use.
Those are phono sockets in an XLR frame. Phonos are designed for line
level - not speaker - connections.
Yes, but work fine with speakers.
I'll take your word for it. But sticking up out of the floor? Doubt they'd
stand being whacked with the Hoover.

why wold you install connectors sticking up? Its not that hard to install something flush.


Phono leads use very thin cable which
isn't what's needed for relatively high current speaker circuits
Indeed, hopefully no-one is fool enough to use those.
Can't see any reason to use a connector not designed for the job when
there is a big variety of ones which are.

What its designed for isn't relevant, what its able to do is. Lots of connectors were never designed for all sorts of tasks they proved good at.


NT

Phono leads use very thin cable which
isn't what's needed for relatively high current speaker circuits

Indeed, hopefully no-one is fool enough to use those.

A while back we stayed at a country pub and got chatting to the
landlord, who was new. (In fact we knew him from his previous pub.) One
problem he'd found was that the sound from the (domestic) 'music centre'
was very quiet in the back room compared to in the lounge, where the
music centre was. I was ****ed enough to volunteer, so the next day I
found that the left speaker for the back room was wired in parallel at
the music centre with the left speaker for the lounge, and ditto for the
right. The cables to the lounge were about 3m long and were the ones
supplied with the music centre I guess, and were something like 0.5mm
csa twin. The cables to the back room were 15m overall at least. The
first 3m was the same stuff as for the lounge, but the rest was a series
of 2m very thin phono cables with male and female ends.

Bill

On Monday, November 17, 2014 8:54:16 PM UTC, Bill Wright wrote:

Phono leads use very thin cable which
isn't what's needed for relatively high current speaker circuits

Indeed, hopefully no-one is fool enough to use those.

A while back we stayed at a country pub and got chatting to the
landlord, who was new. (In fact we knew him from his previous pub.) One
problem he'd found was that the sound from the (domestic) 'music centre'
was very quiet in the back room compared to in the lounge, where the
music centre was. I was ****ed enough to volunteer, so the next day I
found that the left speaker for the back room was wired in parallel at
the music centre with the left speaker for the lounge, and ditto for the
right. The cables to the lounge were about 3m long and were the ones
supplied with the music centre I guess, and were something like 0.5mm
csa twin. The cables to the back room were 15m overall at least. The
first 3m was the same stuff as for the lounge, but the rest was a series
of 2m very thin phono cables with male and female ends.

Bill

I guess he knew no better. I remeber when I was younger sitting in a pub at a table with bell wire draped from light fitting to wherever, with a completely uninsulated chocblock halfway along where people would brush it once ****ed.


NT

On 17/11/2014 13:55, David wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:46:42 +0000, David wrote:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 09:25:54 +0000, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 01:06:01 +0000, Michael Chare wrote:

I imagine you are on about fairly light wires for surround
sound..

That depends on the system. The "5" channels of 5.1 are full
range,
full power channels, so in a decent system you ought to be looking
at
100W each. This needs a decent bit of copper between the amp and
speakers, 2.5 mm^2 plus, "bell wire" doesn't cut it. The .1 is
band
limited, rolls off above around 100 Hz, but as it's the LFE (Low
Frequency Effects) also need a fair bit of omph. Also note that
the
only signal in the LFE are the effects bangs, booms, earthquake
simulation... etc.

76 strand cable is the product to consider:

A step up from the "bell wire" normally supplied and probably OK for
most domestic 5.1 setups with tiddly speakers.

A proper system using full range and full power speakers for the
LCRLrRr needs something a bit more substantial. In a fair bit of
fiddling about in the past the *one* thing that made a real audible
improvement in the system I had was changing the speaker cables from 76
stand to 1024 strand 2.5 mm^2. Really improved the LF, due to better
electrical damping of the speakers with the lower impedance connection.

Any recommendations as to a supplier of speaker cable?

For some reason the Labgear brand immediately makes me think "over
priced".

How about
http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/CASPEAK79.html
looks to be as good a spec and £33.00 (+VAT) per 100M instead of £55.29
per 100M.

Comes in at £44.59 including VAT and delivery.


Ebay is another source

--
Michael Chare

In article ,
wrote:
Can't see any reason to use a connector not designed for the job when
there is a big variety of ones which are.

What its designed for isn't relevant, what its able to do is. Lots of
connectors were never designed for all sorts of tasks they proved good
at.

And even more are used for tasks they ain't suitable for.

I've seen lots and lots of connectors used for speakers. But never phonos.
That should tell you something.

--
*Elephants are the only mammals that can't jump *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, November 17, 2014 6:20:23 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Can't see any reason to use a connector not designed for the job when
there is a big variety of ones which are.


were Speakons not suggested before and/or possibility of using floor pockets , any socket is going to have a plug sticking out of it, good luck with getting twin 2.5mm stranded into a phono plug....

--
*It's this dirty because I washed it with your wife's knickers*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 1:08:15 AM UTC, Adam Aglionby wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 6:20:23 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Can't see any reason to use a connector not designed for the job when
there is a big variety of ones which are.


were Speakons not suggested before and/or possibility of using floor pockets , any socket is going to have a plug sticking out of it, good luck with getting twin 2.5mm stranded into a phono plug....

Use metal plugs, drill out the entry hole


NT

On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 01:03:08 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I've seen lots and lots of connectors used for speakers. But never
phonos.

Meh, the cheap computer flat panel NXT speakers I have here connect
to their amp box with phonos. But if the amp has more than a couple
of watts output I'd be very surprised.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
wrote:
On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 1:08:15 AM UTC, Adam Aglionby wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 6:20:23 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Can't see any reason to use a connector not designed for the job when
there is a big variety of ones which are.


were Speakons not suggested before and/or possibility of using floor
pockets , any socket is going to have a plug sticking out of it, good
luck with getting twin 2.5mm stranded into a phono plug....

Use metal plugs, drill out the entry hole


I'd ask again - what's the point? No matter what posh plugs you use you're
still into a connector which is mechanically very weak. And the bigger the
plug - needed for large speaker cables - the more prone it will be to
damage with any sideways force. And anything mounted on a floor is far
more likely to get thumped than a connector on the back of an amp - which
is what phonos are designed for.

--
*Some days we are the flies; some days we are the windscreen.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article o.uk,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 01:03:08 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I've seen lots and lots of connectors used for speakers. But never
phonos.

Meh, the cheap computer flat panel NXT speakers I have here connect
to their amp box with phonos. But if the amp has more than a couple
of watts output I'd be very surprised.

Ah. Suppose they're no worse than those silly little jacks others use. ;-)

--
*The first rule of holes: If you are in one, stop digging!

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
David wrote:
As far as I can see the best thing is to have connectors in the floor.

Are the speakers so far from walls to make skirting board connectors
impossible?

Trouble with anything in the floor is making good if you decide to move -
or move things around later.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy every minute of it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 10:46:35 AM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 1:08:15 AM UTC, Adam Aglionby wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 6:20:23 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Can't see any reason to use a connector not designed for the job when
there is a big variety of ones which are.

were Speakons not suggested before and/or possibility of using floor
pockets , any socket is going to have a plug sticking out of it, good
luck with getting twin 2.5mm stranded into a phono plug....

Use metal plugs, drill out the entry hole

I'd ask again - what's the point? No matter what posh plugs you use you're
still into a connector which is mechanically very weak. And the bigger the
plug - needed for large speaker cables - the more prone it will be to
damage with any sideways force. And anything mounted on a floor is far
more likely to get thumped than a connector on the back of an amp - which
is what phonos are designed for.

Yes, just saying he can if he wants to


NT

On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 1:05:47 AM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
I've seen lots and lots of connectors used for speakers. But never phonos.
That should tell you something.

I've got phono speaker sockets on a small Realistic (tandy) amplifier from the 1980s

Owain

In article ,
scribeth thus
On Monday, November 17, 2014 3:13:06 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
David wrote:

The smallest footprint seems to be RCA female sockets in the floor.
I am struggling to find a discreet solution - panel mount sockets look
good but they are proud of the floor.
If they are recessed, of course, they are dust traps.
Anyway, http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/rca-connectors/4572896/ look to
offer quite a good compromise between profile and a discreet look when
not in use.

Those are phono sockets in an XLR frame. Phonos are designed for line
level - not speaker - connections.

Yes, but work fine with speakers.

Well ones that pull sod all current etc;!...


Phono leads use very thin cable which
isn't what's needed for relatively high current speaker circuits

Indeed, hopefully no-one is fool enough to use those.


NT

--
Tony Sayer