Heres a question i probably should have asked about 7 years ago. 2 questions actually.
Firstly...The things we use daily when building pedals, input and output...are they called 'jacks'? Cause a google search of "1/4 inch jack" comes up with, the guitar cable male type. Should they technically be called 'sockets' and not 'jacks'?
The second question is the anatomy of the above mentioned socket. "lugs" are the bit we solder onto. "Sleeve" is the bit that protrudes from the enclosure all the way to the "Sleeve Lug". So thats straight forward. But what about the tip and sleeve connections? ie the thing that the tip/sleeve of your guitar cable comes in contact with? I never know what to refer to them as...
Cheers!
Paul
Quote from: chromesphere on December 16, 2012, 02:25:14 AM
Heres a question i probably should have asked about 7 years ago. 2 questions actually.
Firstly...The things we use daily when building pedals, input and output...are they called 'jacks'? Cause a google search of "1/4 inch jack" comes up with, the guitar cable male type. Should they technically be called 'sockets' and not 'jacks'?
The second question is the anatomy of the above mentioned socket. "lugs" are the bit we solder onto. "Sleeve" is the bit that protrudes from the enclosure all the way to the "Sleeve Lug". So thats straight forward. But what about the tip and sleeve connections? ie the thing that the tip/sleeve of your guitar cable comes in contact with? I never know what to refer to them as...
Cheers!
Paul
Hey Paul,
#1 My understanding is that the female part is the jack and the male is the plug. These terms are often misused, similar to the way some people call the receiver on the back of a truck a hitch. The hitch is part of the trailer not the ball on the back of the truck. The ball is the receiver.
From http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Jack-plug#Tip_Ring_Sleeve :
Both two-conductor and three-conductor versions of the three standard sizes are readily available in male (plug) and female (socket or simply "jack") line versions, and panel-mounting female versions.#2 I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. The ring and tip are called just that. So a tip-ring-sleeve (TRS) jack (female) is a stereo jack with three connectors that mate with the plug. When we plug a
mono guitar plug into a TRS jack, the longer sleeve portion of the plug (1 below) contacts both the sleeve and ring of the jack, and the tip of the plug contacts the tip of the jack. This allows us to use the sleeve and ring connections as a switch. There is no continuity between the jack's sleeve and ring connections when the plug is not plugged in. When it is plugged in, it closes the circuit between the sleeve and ring lugs of the jack.
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q485/jdansti/1C9CF877-464B-44E3-AC52-CBBB3DC943A6-6448-000005C886E5D670.jpg)
1. Sleeve: usually ground
2. Ring: Right-hand channel for stereo signals, negative phase for balanced mono signals, power supply for power-requiring mono signal sources
3. Tip: Left-hand channel for stereo signals, positive phase for balanced mono signals, signal line for unbalanced mono signals
4. Insulating rings
Hi Jdansti thanks for the reply!
#1 I agree. Thanks for confirming that!
#2 I think the confusion comes from the fact that if i say the word "tip" it could almost mean 3 different things. The tip of a guitar cable, the tip piece of the jack, or maybe even the tip lug of the jack. Basically if your looking at this image, the picture on the right labeled "t". I think calling it a "tip" could mean a few different things. If thats what its called, thats what its called, but i was just wondering if there was a specific name for that part of the jack. I have been calling it "tip connector" which is probably incorrect as well:
(http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=04fea777994d26cd84e01a5e54f4c01d&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.head-fi.org%2Ft%2F479027%2Frecabling-trs-plug-qustion&v=1&libid=1355650113656&out=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.head-fi.org%2Fc%2Fce%2Fce9c300a_vbattach27737.jpg&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com.au%2Fimgres%3Fnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26tbo%3Dd%26biw%3D1920%26bih%3D911%26tbm%3Disch%26tbnid%3DSYdz_gxkKxEcDM%3A%26imgrefurl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.head-fi.org%2Ft%2F479027%2Frecabling-trs-plug-qustion%26docid%3DUwFNnyWvTfx3zM%26imgurl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fcdn.head-fi.org%2Fc%2Fce%2Fce9c300a_vbattach27737.jpg%26w%3D300%26h%3D349%26ei%3DFpTNUIyGLaqviQf2pIC4Ag%26zoom%3D1%26iact%3Drc%26dur%3D600%26sig%3D102090103235014860812%26page%3D1%26tbnh%3D140%26tbnw%3D120%26start%3D0%26ndsp%3D50%26ved%3D1t%3A429%2Cr%3A1%2Cs%3A0%2Ci%3A91%26tx%3D47%26ty%3D69&title=Recabling%20TRS%20plug%20qustion&txt=&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13556503751853)
I hope that makes sense! :)
Paul
You could use the terminology, "tip contact" and "tip terminal" as shown here:
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q485/jdansti/B01E84BA-0E43-4E1F-9A26-A0FB75C15516-6575-000005EEE383F94A.jpg)
But generally, the word tip is used interchangeably to mean the point where contact is made and where you connect the wire, as shown here.
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q485/jdansti/3DC020E1-5AB6-42B9-BED7-12D42D30DCDE-6575-000005EEDBB76B45.jpg)
Whenever im trying to explain something to do with those...ha...CONTACTS :) i always babble a bit... "This tip...connection...bit...thing". Tip contact sounds good enough. Thanks!
While we are on the topic of jack anatomy, i dont suppose theres also a specific word for the...ahem....wafer bits that seperate the different parts of the jack? (the stuff that looks like PCB). Not important, just curious :)
Paul
> i dont suppose theres also a specific word for the...ahem....wafer bits that seperate the different parts of the jack? (the stuff that looks like PCB).
Maybe there's another word, but I would call those "insulators".
That sounds good. Contacts, check, insulators, check. You know, looking back, this thread is starting to sound like im a bit thick...not sure what other answer i was expecting...
Thanks again ;-)
Paul
If you're thick you're not the only one, I always thought jack referred to the plug but people seem to use it to mean both, I just tend to say plug and socket now to avoid confusion.
Jack:
3. Electricity . a connecting device in an electrical circuit designed for the insertion of a plug.
OK, we know what a "jack" is now.
... but what's a "jill"??
:icon_lol:
Quote from: R.G. on December 16, 2012, 10:51:48 AM
OK, we know what a "jack" is now.
... but what's a "jill"??
:icon_lol:
Four ounces?
I'm with you. I've always preferred socket and plug. Jack is fairly standard in pedal building, but I've run into people that get confused by it. Socket and plug is unambiguous.
Quote from: midwayfair on December 16, 2012, 10:57:58 AM
Quote from: R.G. on December 16, 2012, 10:51:48 AM
OK, we know what a "jack" is now.
... but what's a "jill"??
:icon_lol:
Four ounces?
All of this has my mind tumbling. Maybe I'm just over the hill... ;)
Quote from: pickdropper on December 16, 2012, 12:49:57 PM
Socket and plug is unambiguous.
I agree, im going with this :)
Paul
john dansti saves the day with all the right answers yet again! ;)
Quote from: pinkjimiphoton on December 16, 2012, 11:43:53 PM
john dansti saves the day with all the right answers yet again! ;)
Maybe because I've been
jacking around all my life. Just don't ask me about anything more complicated than jacks and plugs and we'll be OK! ;)
sorry bro, i'm a Jackhole... :icon_mrgreen: :icon_mrgreen: :icon_mrgreen:
What I want to know about jack nomenclature is why they are always referred to as 1/4" jacks, and then measure up to god-knows-what amount under or over 1/4"? I have never put a micrometer to them, but I sure have felt some size variance between jacks.
^ That's an interesting observation. Switchcraft specifies that their plugs have an OD of 1/4" and their jacks have an ID of 1/4". Both dimensions are 1/4" +/- a specified tolerance.
Plug:
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q485/jdansti/A49D5D3D-9B5A-452B-A4B7-85F60B38FBB8-7515-0000070AF5EA1F97.jpg)
Jack:
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q485/jdansti/7D9D8ED3-9FDB-4C66-9EE5-53F641E64011-7515-0000070AE81913C1.jpg)
It seems to me that the jack's ID has to consistently be slightly larger than the plug's OD.
All mechanical connections have tolerances. It's just the nature of manufacturing. Sometimes you can get tighter tolerances if you are willing to pay more.
Well-designed connectors take into account the force of the spring of the contact and make sure the tolerance stack-up is such that the parts still work if the parts are each on the far end of the dimensional tolerances.
remember too, that a lot of times, they're manufactured not to 1/4", but 6.33mm. it's a minute difference, but it's there.
i'm jacked about this discussion...lol :icon_mrgreen:
^
You...Don't..Know...
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q485/jdansti/B73C6878-E222-4BA6-830D-77930E06BEAD-8105-00000814B6411398.jpg)
Quote from: pickdropper on December 17, 2012, 01:22:17 AM
All mechanical connections have tolerances. It's just the nature of manufacturing. Sometimes you can get tighter tolerances if you are willing to pay more.
Well-designed connectors take into account the force of the spring of the contact and make sure the tolerance stack-up is such that the parts still work if the parts are each on the far end of the dimensional tolerances.
Agreed.
QuoteIt seems to me that the jack's ID has to consistently be slightly larger than the plug's OD.
Yes, but there are a few details in those drawing the casual observer will likely miss which make it not-so-obvious.
The use of REF after a dimension means it's for reference only, and is not a controlled dimension. Meaning, you can't manufacture or inspect to it, but it's a "nice to have" for one reason or another. So that 1.4" REF could mean the part is 0.250 +/- 0.001 or 0.255 +/- 0.005 or 0.25 +/- 0.01, all of which are different dimensions mechanically but could easily be called out with "1/4" REF". The real dimensions are probably contained on the manufacturing drawing, not the reference drawing.
The other thing of note is the dimension on the jack, 0.25 dia. Tolerancing is often called out using a global tolerance based on the precision of the dimension (places needing other tolerances are called out on a case by case basis, see the 1.015 +/- 0.015 dimension for instance).
For example:
all 0.X dimensions would be +/- 0.1
all 0.XX dimensions would be +/- 0.01
all 0.XXX dimensions would be +/- 0.001
So that 0.25 dia is really 0.25 dia +/- some tolerance, but without the rest of the drawing you're left hanging as to what that tolerance actually is.
Now to the point, while looking at the drawings the 1/4" REF and 0.25 dia appear to be the same, but from a geometric tolerating and dimensioning perspective they are not, and further the drawings don't contain enough information to determine the type of fit (free, line to line, interference, etc). So while intuitively the plug must be smaller than the hole in the jack, the drawings don't have enough info to support that. When one accounts for the tolerance stack up of the parts, you could get something that doesn't work if that was all of the information provided to the shop for manufacturing.
P.S., sorry to anyone reading this who actually does GD&T for a living, I hope I didn't butcher the terminology too bad.