- Jul 7, 2006
- Reaction score
- Jul 7, 2006
Well, I'm just making friends all over the place tonight. Please know that there is a smile on my face as I write this. Even though we disagree, I hope we can have a productive and illuminating exchange that will be mutually beneficial and helpful to others. I want to respect your perspective, even though it may be, and in fact, is wrong.As I pointed out above, the lower profile is simply not true and the fact the 3.5mm alliance had to resort to misleading graphics to make their point shows this. A 0.9mm difference in diameter hardly matters in high end DAPs where thickness is never a huge concern. Most DAPs - especially TOTL ones - already uses big components such as high quality capacitors and heavy thick shielding to get better SQ results that shaving 1mm off the thickness is not really that high of a priority, and I'd argue audiophiles would care more about how the inside is properly designed, shielded and what high quality component is used rather than a 1mm difference in thickness as we are not talking about smartphones trends here. Also the 3.5mm Pro jacks are clearly of lesser designed than 4.4mm ones - again see where I pointed out that 4.4mm Pentaconn sockets has two contact points for each pin to ensure proper connection and rigidity where the 3.5mm Pro only uses the traditional single spring contact point of 2.5mm and 3.5mm jacks, so if you care about cable adaptors then you should also care about the quality of the socket themselves because they also form part of the connection, and here the 3.5mm Pro sockets neither provide a higher quality contact in itself, and the quality of the components so far looks cheaply made. I already suspected that this is because they are simply reusing currently available TRRS components which are most likely just spill over stock from smartphones components, rather than proper high grade components such as those found for 4.4mm gear where everything was designed and made from the ground up to be specifically used in audio application. Worrying about adaptors while overlooking the socket and plug themselves in the device is kind of missing the forest for the tree.
I'm so sorry. I'm joking. It's 5am here, I'm sleep deprived and I'm wanting to play. Honestly, seriously, no disrespect. Our common passion already should make us friends.
Let me say again: the 4.4 is my. favorite connector that the audio world has ever produced. Like yourself, I do care very much about high grade components, and suspect that we share a belief that they do matter in terms of SQ. I don't share the notion that a $2 Radioshack (R.I.P) connector sounds no different than a $75 Furutech rhodium plated copper alloy conductor. I don't think the quality is just marketing, or even just about robust longevity, I value it for its sonic performance.
Having said that, I think that is actually the secondary point. We're talking about the design, at least I was, not the present implementation. 4.4 has had a bit of time now to produce some high quality, well constructed models. 3.5 pro is the new kid, and I think the best producers of connectors are waiting to see if it gains traction before they commit R&D resources. If it does, I'm sure we will see connectors of equally high caliber.
It is about the format, and we've all felt the pinch of being caught up in the turf war over who controls the balanced connectors: 2.5mm, 4.4, Kobiconn for heaven's sake, and now 3.5pro? But, I don't think we should be short sighted and asses which one is the best by the quality of presently available plugs. Whoever wins will make the best sounding, highest quality plugs. They'll have the best builders researching metals, materials, shielding, cryogenic processing!, and how best to construct and exploit the design. But, again which design.
I honestly don't know if the number of contact points is intrinsic to the difference between 4.4. and 3.5pro or just the present poor quality 3.5 pro connectors. I don't know if a high quality 3.5 pro connector might remedy the situation you flagged with better contact geometry. To be honest with you, I'm not sure how much real world difference it would make, as long as the single contact was made of the best materials and constructed to the highest of tolerances.
Also, I actually don't take the difference in diameter between 3.5mm and 4.4mm too seriously one way or the other. When I said the 3.5mm had a slimmer profile I just meant for a portable device–all things being even–I would rather have something smaller, but that the 2.5 does make me nervous. I do agree with you, if the–design–of the 4.4 actually produced a sonic benefit over the–design–of the 3.5pro, I'd take it in a heart beat. But, that's a tough sell, I think a Furutech made 3.5 pro would sound as good as a Furutech 4.4 (I like Furutech), and you wouldn't be able to tell them apart sonically.
What I do know is that–one–plug that can fit both SE or balanced amps would be of a clear real world benefit and would get my vote to swing in that direction as an actual step forward. If that's missing the forest for the tree, well, that's a good tree. And I'm saying if that tree gets planted a whole industry of piug designers will grow a new forest, a better forest (huge, silly, sleepy smile).
All the best to you Nanaholic, sincerely.