What the heck are these plugs for?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
I needed to replace a 1/8" stereo plug on a cord. I found on ebay a pack
of three 1/8" stereo plugs from China, for about $2. I dont normally
order from China, but for the price and since I was in no hurry for
them, I bought them.

That was a mistake. They are NOT stereo, they are THREE CHANNEL. The tip
of the plug has THREE contacts, (plus the grounded base). What the heck
are they for? I have never seen any 3 prong 1/8" jacks on anything.  

Yea, I could just ground the uppermost terminal so it acts as a stereo
plug, but it gets worse. Under the shell, I found a solder on ground
contact. But none of the three conductors have any contacts attached to
them. There are just three pieces of "rod" sticking out the back, with
the insulation in between. I would have to wrap the wires around them,
and solder them and by the time I manage to do all that in that tiny
space, I'd probably melt the insulation between the sections and unless
they wires were hair thin, they would short against the ground terminal.

For the small price, I am not gonna make a big deal out of it. I'll just
have to order some properly made plugs from an American manufacturer,
and use these worthless plugs for a conversation piece.


Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On Saturday, July 1, 2017 at 5:08:38 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it



A link would be nice, but I've seen plugs like what you're describing used for plug in keyboards, controllers, and even small power supplies - anything that needs a quick disconnect.


Re: What the heck are these plugs for?



I needed to replace a 1/8" stereo plug on a cord. I found on ebay a pack
of three 1/8" stereo plugs from China, for about $2. I dont normally
order from China, but for the price and since I was in no hurry for
them, I bought them.

That was a mistake. They are NOT stereo, they are THREE CHANNEL. The tip
of the plug has THREE contacts, (plus the grounded base). What the heck
are they for? I have never seen any 3 prong 1/8" jacks on anything.

Yea, I could just ground the uppermost terminal so it acts as a stereo
plug, but it gets worse. Under the shell, I found a solder on ground
contact. But none of the three conductors have any contacts attached to
them. There are just three pieces of "rod" sticking out the back, with
the insulation in between. I would have to wrap the wires around them,
and solder them and by the time I manage to do all that in that tiny
space, I'd probably melt the insulation between the sections and unless
they wires were hair thin, they would short against the ground terminal.

For the small price, I am not gonna make a big deal out of it. I'll just
have to order some properly made plugs from an American manufacturer,
and use these worthless plugs for a conversation piece.




**********************************************************



You find these on things like headsets and mobile phones where you have  
stereo audio plus a microphone down the same cable.


Gareth.





Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You seem to have bought TRRS rather than TRS plugs, mobile phones often  
use them for stereo headsets with mic (and sometimes answer/end call  
buttons, or FF/REW buttons)


Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On Saturday, July 1, 2017 at 5:08:38 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it



I've also seen them on X-Box headsets now that I think about it.

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
They are for cell phone headsets and other connections to a phone (like a  
car).  Left and right audio out, and microphone.  Blame Apple.

Jon

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On 7/1/2017 8:14 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
I could be wrong, but I think I read somewhere that the Brits used to  
use similar plugs for their (landline) phones. Think they called it,  
"plug-and-jack (or -socket)?"

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 9:20:24 AM UTC-4, Madness wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Back in the day, Bell System phones were 4-wire, and all 4 had some function. Most of the world (back then) used 4 wires - Poland, apparently, used 5.  

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA  

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote on 7/6/2017 10:14 AM:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The Bell System used two wires for the phone line and if you had a Princess  
phone the other two were used to supply power for the lighted dial.  
Otherwise the other two were for your second extension line.  This has  
nothing to do with the four way plugs and jacks the OP is talking about.

--  

Rick C

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 10:30:43 AM UTC-4, rickman wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
ss  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Bell System:

Up to 1930 - three active wires: Voice/Ringer/Ground
From 1930 well into the 1960s, up until touch-tone *in some regions* and wi
th some providers: Four active wires: Voice/Ringer/Side-Tone Suppression/Gr
ound

At some point, the side-tone suppression function was served by a small cap
acitor - this took a few years to become universal. A diode allowed all fun
ctions to be handled by only two wires. After which the additional wires co
uld serve such niceties as lighting. BUT - those functions required a local
 wall-wart type power-supply feeding a jack for proper distribution.  

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA  

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On 7/2/2017 3:44 AM, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Not hardly, people don't think of 10 inches as 0.833 feet nor do
they think of 10 feet as 3.333 yards.


--  
Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
Foxs Mercantile wrote on 7/2/2017 5:31 AM:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

What do they think of feet and yards?  To me a yard is *about* a meter and a  
foot is 0.3 meters.

--  

Rick C

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Wrong.  You're creating more digits than was originally intended by
adding spurious significant figures.  10 inches has only two
significant figures.  Therefore:
   10 in = 0.83 ft = 0.00016 miles = 0.57 Roman cubits
and so on.

For domestic consumption, I use US units.  For scientific, I use
metric units.  For political discussions (i.e. AGW) or when I want to
confuse the reader, I use SI units.  When dealing with government
agencies, I use the same as what they prefer, which are usually units
of measure that have been aged for at least 100 years.  For Usenet
discussions, I use a wide mixture of these, to insure that my
assertions and guessing cannot be verified.


--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
Jeff Liebermann wrote on 7/2/2017 1:19 PM:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I see you attended the same school as my chemistry lab professor.  
"Significant digits" is an idea that is very dated and was only useful when  
performing the simplest calculations like the ones we did on a slide rule.  
The real issue is accuracy.  I can measure 10 feet with an accuracy better  
than a sixteenth of an inch (yeah, I said sixteenth because that's how my  
tapes are marked off) and I will still note it as 10 feet.

When I perform calculations I want to preserve the accuracy of the result,  
so the calculations are done with a higher degree of accuracy than the  
initial data.  How much more accuracy should be used depends on the extent  
and nature of the calculations.  One subtraction of large numbers can result  
in a small number which does not have nearly as much accuracy as the initial  
data.  Add to that lack of accuracy with limited precision intermediate  
representation and you can end up with pointless data.

I would also point out that in both cases the final digits repeat.  There is  
no way to show a vinculum in ascii so seeing repeating digits at the end of  
a fraction is a clue.  There is nothing wrong with specifying the conversion  
exactly.  10 inches is 0.833 (vinculum implied but not shown).  Leave it off  
and you *add* to the initial error.

--  

Rick C

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Probably.  The standard lecture was to pace off some distance ending
up a bit short.  One then measures the remaining distance to a much
higher degree of precision.  Take the number of paces, multiply by 1
yard/pace, add the precision measured distance, and the sum is a
fairly useless number.

How accurate can the average tape measure wielding reader measure 10


Quoted text here. Click to load it


inch or 0.0625 inches, your actual distance would land somewhere
between 9.9375 and 10.0625.  This does not mean that your tape measure
is accurate to 1/10,000th of an inch.  To be accurate, one needs to
specify the measurement tolerances, as is common on all mechanical
drawings and an amazing number of schematics that still display
tolerances.  

Using a steel rule, if you're able to measure the required 10 inches


number of spans of my index finger between the first two joints.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Argh.  I sometimes see that in parts drawings.  Some newly minted
mechanical designer grinds out every dimension to whatever number of
digits he has his calculator configured, and then doesn't bother
providing a usable tolerance.  The result is the machine shop doesn't

less.  Such excess precision tends to dramatically raise parts costs.
If you want to preserve your accuracy on your own design notes, that's
fine.  Just don't submit those numbers to anyone that has to make or
price the part.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yep.  That's roughly what I've been mumbling about.  

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Very true.  The convention is to round off anything that ends in 5 to
the next higher digit.  So,  
   0.8333333333 will round off to 0.833 or 0.83 or 0.8
and:
   0.8666666666 will round off to 0.867 or 0.87 or 0.9






--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On Sunday, 2 July 2017 18:19:23 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann  wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Lol. Reminds me when I got criticised for mixing metric & imperial in a technical drawing. Widget A was normally supplied in imperial units, widget B in mm, so it was the sensible way to go. But bigco bs ruled, causing extra work to be done.


NT

Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
On Sun, 2 Jul 2017 16:12:57 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Chuckle.  Sounds very familiar.  I haven't mixed dimensions on a
technical drawing yet, mostly because I usually have someone else do
the work.  However, a few months ago, I gave an ill prepared and short
notice talk on radiation measurement, where I managed to mix the older
conventional units of measure (Curie, Rad, and Rem) with the new and
not so improved SI units (Becquerel, Sievert, and Gray).
<https://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/measurement.asp
Audience confusion was averted by me having a conversion program
running on my tablet, where I was able to rapidly supply numbers in
both measurement system.  I'm fairly functional in both systems, as is
evident by being able to make the same mistakes in both systems, but
forgot that others have their personal preferences.  

Actually, there's a 3rd system of radiation measurement that I
fortunately didn't mention.  Health physics uses electron volts (eV)
or sometimes joules to measure radiation dosage.

In my area of expertise, the RF industry has resisted pressure to name
units of measure after notable dead scientists and instead uses
fundamental units and ratios.  It sometimes gets a bit complexicated,
such as RF field power, density, intensity, etc.  I have a handy cheat
sheet available to keep me sane:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/coverage/VZW-water-plant/Field%20Intensity%20and%20Power%20Density.pdf
That audio industry does much of the same with various dB over some
reference level measurements (dB, dBm, dBw, dBC, dBA, dBi, dBu, dBmV,
dBV, dB/uV, dBrn, dB-SPL, dBrnC, etc).  More:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel#Suffixes_and_reference_values


--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: What the heck are these plugs for?
Hello!


nit conversion app that I'm releasing a new version of, and I thought I'd s
ee if people around here would like to test it.








(but don't, it make them mad).


.com/apps/testing/appinventor.ai_RoyceGrey.Frank_Harr_s_Conversion_App


Site Timeline