ClocksEye^2

[PeterSt]

People,

 

1 hour ago, davide256 said:

mmm,

 

On 10/23/2018 at 8:19 AM, PeterSt said:

So yes, a first question would be what connectors people use.

The second I kind of implied already : this shouldn't be about enormous lengths while next any shielding effect should be "more minimal" *because* the shorter length.

And I tend to make traces on a PCB for "clock wires". haha.

 

1 hour ago, davide256 said:

mmm, time perhaps to start a different thread perhaps on coax?  Hate to see the buzz value of this thread diluted /distracted from your "in market" excellent

Lush 2

 

 

Maybe the name of the cable makes no sense in the end, but the Lush^2 thread seems too easy to divert to a clock ^2 cable while it already pollutes to Blaxius^2 as well.

For the clock connection (50 Ohm coax) possibly discussion is required to some extent because it is not really standard as such to outboard-connect a clock/oscillator to a source, while it also could easily be inboard just the same. Or maybe it is about the latter even more. Point thus is : there is no standard, so what to do.

 

For inboard (PCB to PCB) connections there is some kind of standard all right but it is still not said that these are used by you out there. But this would be (Hirose) U.FL.

   

(these are both of the same size, but the right hand one is zoomed in a bit more). Here you see it applied :

 

 

with the notice that the wire you see here is maybe 1.5mm diameter. Almost nothing ...

But now this :

 

 

This is the other end of the cable (um, wire) of the U.FL part as you see in the previous picture.. But, end of the cable can be everything. Can also be U.FL again.

Or there is no PCB side like you see it here and it is some chassis connector. Or ...

 

RF Connector types

 

We would have no problem with even the smallest connectors, and wires as such -  make it with 3 extra shields and set it up with configurations as ^2 can be. ? And keep it tiny and flexible.

But there can't be a standard for even one end of the cable/wire.

 

A short cable like maybe 10-15 cm or shorther would cost as few as maybe 150 euros (in full ^2 setup). However, the always sorting out, purchasing, not being able to purchase in quantities - is killing. Or at least it seems to be at this moment. This probably makes it more expensive.

 

And so I don't know whether this is a good idea.

Thoughts ?

 

Peter

 

 

[d_elm]

I think it is a good idea.  I purchased three 30cm RF cables from Pasternack and have put three layers of shielding, as with latest Lush^2 configuration, on two of the cables and the third will be done soon.  I think it is a step in the right direction with more bass being produced.  I do not have a Habst cable to compare to and I think this is key for acceptance by CA members, assuming your cable ranks well.

[elan120]

I would be interested in all these configurations as I am currently have following in 50ohm impedance setup:

• U.FL to BNC 
• U.FL to SMB Jack
• U.FL to U.FL
• BNC to BNC

 

[PeterSt]

2 minutes ago, elan120 said:

• U.FL to BNC 
• U.FL to SMB Jack
• U.FL to U.FL
• BNC to BNC

 

Yeah, right. And that's only you. 

I think it is a good idea that you (and everybody when they like to contribute) also mentions the required length (estimation is fine !) and whether it's an outboard or inboard application. I mean, the U.FL wires are normally not really for outboard, although it could be made because they will be stronger in ^2 fashion. But otherwise, blow at them and they will break.

The reason I'm asking could be the ^2^2 getting mad if also the wire/cable as such must vary.

 

Thanks !

[elan120]

2 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Yeah, right. And that's only you. 

I think it is a good idea that you (and everybody when they like to contribute) also mentions the required length (estimation is fine !) and whether it's an outboard or inboard application. I mean, the U.FL wires are normally not really for outboard, although it could be made because they will be stronger in ^2 fashion. But otherwise, blow at them and they will break.

The reason I'm asking could be the ^2^2 getting mad if also the wire/cable as such must vary.

 

Thanks !

Sure...here is the revised list:

• U.FL to BNC - 6 to 8 inches - inboard
• U.FL to SMB Jack - 12 to 14 inches - inboard
• U.FL to U.FL - 6 to 8 and 12 to 14 inches - inboard
• BNC to BNC - 6 and 12 to 14 inches - outboard
• SMB plug to SMB plug - 12 to 14 inches - outboard

 

[davide256]

 Would expect RCA/BNC coax for source to DAC to have a much larger market of users within the CA community than those who use a  clocking connector and as a

 product manager I always found  there were less launch duds if you crawled before you ran. BNC to BNC might be the logical starting point to test the waters...

[lmitche]

9 hours ago, elan120 said:

Sure...here is the revised list:

• U.FL to BNC - 6 to 8 inches - inboard
• U.FL to SMB Jack - 12 to 14 inches - inboard
• U.FL to U.FL - 6 to 8 and 12 to 14 inches - inboard
• BNC to BNC - 6 and 12 to 14 inches - outboard
• SMB plug to SMB plug - 12 to 14 inches - outboard

 

Sorry to say that there are at least 4 different u.fl connector sizes. I just learned this the hard way when trying to buy a u.fl to sma pigtail for a WiFi radio. Luckily they are pretty cheap.

[Superdad]

43 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Sorry to say that there are at least 4 different u.fl connector sizes.

 

Yeah and I hate them all!   They are rated for very few plug/unplug cycles.  Apple got smart and now when they use them for internal attachment of wifi antennas (e.g. in Mac mini), they have a hold-down clamp with a screw.