Why so few devices with BNC's??


It's an ongoing amazement to me how many manufacturers use RCA's for 75 ohm digital connections.   Is this really to just save a couple bucks?  Lower end McIntosh stuff has RCA's as does most Japanese gear regardless of price.  It's not like BNC's are really so exotic, and 75 ohm cables are readily available.  In fact, the general lack of inputs is an annoyance.  Not everybody wants to use USB or Toslink.  Rant over. 😠  Thanks for reading.

[Please, this is NOT a thread to list all the exceptions.]

kletter1mann

Showing 4 responses by russ69

BNCs are much more expensive than RCAs. RCAs were designed for an audio signal and the BNCs are usually used for RF signals, although there is some crossover.  

@russ69  Uh....  yes, we know that.  A few bucks (maybe) vs a few cents. 

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The RCA's only weakness is long cable runs, the XLR solved that issue and is a standard at this point. The BNC offers nothing in the way of improved sonics.

BNC works good in high vibration environments, like aircraft. The locking feature is not needed for home audio.

This thread is about digital connections! 

Sorry I didn't notice that until now. The answer is the same though, audio manufacturers are comfortable with RCA connectors and they cost less and do the job.