Talk:XLR connector

message: Proposed change, right after the photo:
EIA Standard RS-297-A describes the use of the XLR3 for audio signal level applications. Before the standard was adopted, some audio equipment manufacturers reversed the use of pin 2 (properly the normal or "hot" input) and pin 3 (inverting input). This was generally not significant when using entirely balanced signal paths, since balanced outputs will have the same polarity as their inputs and no one will know the difference. But this could be a huge problem when going from balanced to unbalanced signals, as when using an unbalanced, XLR-equipped, pin-3-hot signal processing device (like older Klark Teknik compressors and gates) with a mixing desk that had unbalanced insert points and insert cables that wired the insert connnector's shield to pin 3. The result would be no signal whatsoever, unless one rewired the insert cable or made two special adapters to swap pins 2 and 3 for each inserted channel. Such problems were only exacerbated when using cables that were wired tip-send with a ring-send desk (see tip ring sleeve). It was much better to have a processor that also had 1/4" connectors. [Can you tell I had personal experience with this???]
The pin 2 vs. pin 3 debate was such an important and almost comical issue that, during at least one Audio Engineering Society convention in the late 1980s, one manufacturer (or the AES itself?) handed out spinny wheels, with a needle mounted to a piece of cardboard that was printed with a pie shape with pieces alternately labeled "pin 2 hot" and "pin 3 hot"--showing that whether a manufacturer chose pin 2 or pin 3 was seemingly completely random. [I can take a digital photo of this wheel if anyone is interested.]
But pin 2 is now the standard. Pin 1 is always earth, and many connectors connect it internally to the connector body.
:I'm probably being dense here, but I don't understand the 3rd sentence: "This was generally not significant when using entirely balanced signal paths, since balanced outputs will have the same polarity as their inputs and no one will know the difference."
:1.) Why will balanced outputs always have the same polarity as their inputs?  Also, 2.) if someone accidentally reversed the + and - (i.e. "hot" and "cold") signals when, say, wiring a connector, would this not cause that signal to be 180 deg. out of phase with all other signals?  I'd think that would be noticed when mixing the reversed signal with anything else not so reversed.  What am I missing here (e.g. what's about to really embarrass me)? Ob1-kenogle (talk) 06:07, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed change

message: I believe the above mention of X being for earth, L being for Live and R being for return is what tends to confuse many young people in the industry and those visiting this site.--Tm1000 01:01, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion  

message: I assume XLR only carries a mono signal? kwami 11:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep.  I guess it could carry an unbalanced stereo signal, too, like a TRS connector, but I've never seen this used in actual products. — Omegatron 16:22, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

text: XLR3 can carry a stereo signal if you use two cables - is that what those euro-DJ's use, or they get a stereo signal through a single XLR?  That seems impossible, given the description.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flickharrison (talk • contribs) 18:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Obviously, when an XLR is used to transmit AES/EBU digital audio, then it carries 2 channels on a single connector.132.185.160.98 (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

text: Would carrying mid/side encoded stereo on unbalanced lines in XLR3 cables have any advantages over unbalanced L+R stereo, regarding noise reduction or other details for which balanced lines would normally be chosen? I can already see one (the existence of a convenient mono signal when wanted), but are there any others inherent to the conversion back to L+R on arrival? I tried to answer my own question, and find a mixed answer... It looks like one channel may gain from common mode reduction, while the other gains a boost! On the other hand, both channels need a 6dB cut to restore original signal levels, so some noise reduction occurs, but the net result seems to be good common mode reduction on one resultant L+R channel only, none on the other, so I'll assume this is not a practical idea to try, and that unbalanced L+R throughout is better if forcing stereo through XLR3. 31.51.85.171 (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  mono? 

message: Isn't the advantage of two inverted signals that the receiver can use them noise cancellation?
:essentially yes as our balanced audio article says "Much of the noise induced in the cable is induced equally in both signal lines, so this noise can be easily rejected by using a differential amplifier or a balun at the input." Plugwash 19:37, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really. The advantage of two signals, one inverted with respect to the other, is that you get a higher SNR at the receiver by virtue of higher signal level - since the receiver sees  live-return, and  return == -live, so the result is 2x live. But common mode rejection doesn't require that the "return" carry an inverted copy of the "live" signal! Common practice in a lot of the less expensive pro gear is to not actively drive the "return" at all, but instead connect it to signal ground through a resistor that matches the "live" terminal's source impedance. Noise picked up by the cable is then picked up equally in both conductors, and is cancelled by live-return. The "return" line is not required to be actively driven for that to work. This is called "resistor balancing" or "impedance balancing". Jeh (talk) 18:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is sort of off topic for this article. You guys might want to have a look at and consider improving Differential signaling, Balanced line or Balanced audio. -—Kvng 13:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

text: No, it is not "just plain wrong", it is widespread industry practice. The driven equipment's inputs are still balanced, i.e. of the same impedance as each other, so the same noise is induced in both conductors; ((S+N) - (0+N)) cancels the N just as would ((S+N) - (-S+N)). You do lose the advantage of doubled signal level, and so you lose 6 dB of SNR... but on the other hand, the impedance-balancing technique does avoid certain pitfalls. (The two op-amps that drive the "hot" and "return" pins can never be identical, so the live and return signals are not actually symmetric; plug a TS plug into a TRS output with actively driven "return" and you short an op-amp output to ground; not generally a good thing; otoh a transformer-driven balanced out has to have "return" connected to ground if it's to drive an unbalanced input; etc.) As for Johnson noise, that is many, many dB below the signal levels of interest, even at mic level. It is a concern when building a 24-bit ADC or DAC (Johnson noise makes it essentially impossible to achieve 24 bits' worth of SNR in the audio band without cryo), but not when a "mere" 110 dB or so of SNR is sufficient. Anyway, do you think there are no resistors in the path of, and adding Johnson noise to, an actively driven "return signal" pin? Do you think the op-amp on the "return" pin adds no noise of its own? Transformer-driven balanced outs do avoid that issue. But those are very uncommon, as suitable transformers are large and expensive. See references 6 and 7 in the Balanced line article. Ref 6 is available online and provides an excellent description. Yes, actively driving the return pin has some advantages, but except for very long lines (he says 100m) the advantages are insignificant compared to the cost. Jeh (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common mode noise cancellation 

message: the start of the article atm reads "XLR plugs and sockets are used mostly in professional audio and video electronics cabling applications. Home audio and video electronics normally use RCA connectors.". are xlr connectors used for video or just used along side video? (i've always thought it was the latter) --MilkMiruku 12:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I've never heard of XLR connectors being used for video, and they're not recorded as such in the AVconn template at the bottom of the article. I've removed this reference. I've also removed mention of power from the introduction, since they're no longer used for mains power (I don't know how common phantom power is now). Isidore (talk) 08:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: XLR cables are used to supply power to video cameras. It is in carrying power that they are used in video, not in carrying video signal. They also carry audio signal to video cameras, of course, and intercom signals to the camera operator. In these senses, especially power, XLRs are used "in professional audio and video electronics cabling applications". Binksternet (talk) 14:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  video?? 

message: Can anyone tell when XLR was invented?
 This link from ITT-Cannon is a PDF of XLR products. On page 4 they state that XLR was introduced in 1958.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.170.14 (talk) 09:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is now a page with some details about the development of XLR connectors at http://www.soundfirst.com/xlr.html Some of this information could probably be repurposed for this wiki page. --BenFranske (talk) 07:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ray Rayburn's page. He's probably among the top three guys in the world who would know. A very expert source. Binksternet (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Someone using IP addresses from Chicago added 1915 last December with this unreferenced edit. I don't see any reason to keep that year in the article. Binksternet (talk) 16:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: I found some more XLR connectors in a box of junk so Ihave taken some pictures.  Leave someone else to fit on the main page if wanted. I have some XLR3 but you seem to have that covered OK.  --jmb 15:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent!  Thanks! — Omegatron 17:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Awesome. -- Ned Scott 20:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: I will see if I can borrow one (after Christmas probably) and take a brighter picture if not been done by then.  --jmb 01:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can try to take a better one tomorrow. — Omegatron 02:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: (→XLR3 connectors - «+"XLR and 1/4' TRS combo jack."» not the best picture of a dark object.

message: There seems to be a lot of confusion in the "end user" world about what to look for in XLR cables (as opposed to the XLR connections on equipment, which an "end user" can't practically change.
I added a small reference to that in the main page ... is there another reference that should be put there?  Or another Wiki page that could also be referenced?  My quick search didn't find one.
Here is a an external link to a longer note I wrote in another Wiki recently Bose Wiki Reference article on technical aspects of XLR cables
DanCornett 17:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Signal vs. Chassis Grounds and Cable Shield connections

message: The XLR  is now the standard connector for battery chargers and mobility aid vehicles like wheel chairs and scooters. The female part is on the charger cable and the male part is build into the vehicle. Pin 1 is battery plus, pin 2 battery minus and pin 3 an inhibit signal which prevents the vehicle from driving while the charger is connected. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.33.174.22 (talk) 08:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  battery charger connector 

message: Deleted:
"Note that neither the standards nor manufacturers agree on the best way to handle the usage of pin 1 at both ends of a cable, particularly with respect to the cable shield, the connector's shell, signal ground, and a third cable wire connected to pin 1 — which may (or may not) be connected to the shield."
Err...third cable wire? Every balanced cable I have has a shield and one twisted pair. Pin 1 in the shield on cables, as specified by AES14-1992. AES48-2005  specifies exactly what to do with it in equipment, and good engineers have known the designs in that standard for decades (for example, the telephone network uses the same principles, runs hundreds of miles, and does not hum). Granted, there is some equipment that gets it wrong, and sometimes the problem can be solved by things like disconnecting pin 1 on one end of the cable, but to say that there is no standard or consensus is misleading and not helpful. How to design audio equipment interconnects and how to solve commonly encountered problems with them is not a topic to be neglected, and if it's to be discussed, I reckon it deserves an article of its own.  provides a good overview of the problem. 70.9.137.32 21:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pin 1 

message: Hi I've seen a lot of references to XLR-3-32 and XLR-3-31, but haven't been able to find a definition of what they mean. I have assumed that one is female and the other is male and the 32 and 31 refer to the pinout. If anyone wants to clear this up, I would greatly appreciate it! 74.14.228.158 15:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are ITT Cannon part number detail for panel mount male and female three-contacts. Maybe we can add this link . Other mfgs have equivalent part numbers of course. Meggar 17:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  XLR-3-32 / XLR-3-31 Confusion 

message: Can someone please report the fundamental dimensions [eg. plug diameter, pin spacings & thier diameters, etc etc] of XLR connectors in the article - thank you--83.105.33.91 15:38, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately the drawings with those numbers are part of the IEC standard and subject to copyright. More unfortunately, many of the permissible values are so broad that there are many cases of supposedly intermateable connectors either failing to mate and latch, or being so loose as to rattle. Altaphon (talk) 20:56, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dimensions 

message: Ray Rayburn says XLR is XL Rubber. User:99.233.87.254, a self-professed former Cannon engineer, says the R is Round. Can someone prove the XLR showed up before it had a rubbery pin strata in the female? Can anyone prove that the XL connector was already round? Either of these cases would go a long way toward settling the matter. Binksternet 05:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ''R''ound or ''R''ubber?

message: Does this section really enhance this article? It seems to be a bit close to trivia for my liking (Rexeltw (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mnemonics 

message: A google search using 'xternal live return' (XLR) gives many examples where this is taken to be the
correct words for the abbreviation. I have also read 'xtra live return' (XLR), but I think this must
be wrong, or possibly just not recognised. Personally, I don't think Canon XL with Rubber is correct:
perhaps once it was, but no longer is, especially as companies such as Neutrik now use the label XLR. Richard Nowell (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your personal research and opinion. It is in conflict with the exhaustive research done by Ray Rayburn, a Fellow of the Audio Engineering Society. Binksternet (talk) 16:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: XLR Abbreviation

message: what is long form xlr  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.220.143.5 (talk) 10:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no long form, except perhaps Cannon X connector with Latch and Resilient neoprene around the female contacts. Binksternet (talk) 05:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's right. Personally I have never seen Xternal Live Return mentioned before looking at this talk page, and it doesn't appear in any standard I know of on the topic. Altaphon (talk) 20:54, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  tell 

message: The phantom power section (which appears to be lifted straight from phantom power) says:
This is in marked contrast to another, slightly earlier method of powering known as parallel powering or T-powering (from the German term Tonaderspeisung), in which DC was overlaid directly onto the signal in differential mode. (emphasis mine)
I'm confused how parallel powering is different than phantom power (from a wiring point of view, I don't know what voltage it ran at, nor do I think it matters).  Could anyone provide more information (and if so, phantom power should probably be updated first/as well).  And since I'm new to adding to discussions, what's the proper way to cross-post (if it is proper) this request to phantom power? Velowiki (talk) 16:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Cross posting seems appropriate Talk:Phantom_power#Cross_post_from_XLR_connector. --Kvng (talk) 23:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm no expert (who is?) but Phantom power says in part  T-power, also known as A-B powering [5] or 12T, described in DIN 45595, is an alternative to phantom powering that is fading into obsolescence. In this scheme, 12 volts is applied through 180 Ohm resistors between the microphone's "hot" terminal (XLR pin 2) and the microphone's "cold" terminal (XLR pin 3). This results in a 12 volt potential difference with significant current capability across pins 2 and 3, which would likely cause permanent damage if applied to a dynamic or ribbon microphone. Parallel power ignores the shield.  Phantom power the cable shield as the return. --Wtshymanski (talk) 00:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parallel powering information 

message: We can see difference between two models of XLR6.Of course you can't replace one by the other.
   For instance,the model for loudspeaker on Turntable EMT 948(pins location is symetric) and the other more recent model with asymetric location of pins.
  I have picture but too difficult to insert.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.221.139.123 (talk) 08:24, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  XLR 6 Differences 

message: There is no mention in the whole article about one of XLR's most important and distinguishing (say, from USB, heh) properties: its extreme robustness, reliability and quality.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.196.68 (talk) 23:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robustness 

message: As far as I can tell, the pin out diagram is incorrect. The numbering for male and female are reversed.  Female XLR plugs are 1-2-3, left-right-bottom and male XLR are 2-1-3.  1 being ground, 2 being hot and 3 cold.  This is according to RaneNote 110 (pretty well known sound reinforcement wiring technical document) as well as the diagram on Clark Wire & Cable's website.  --CableModem^^ (talk) 12:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The difference is that Rane shows the back side of the connector, where the wires are connected (usually by solder). The diagram in the Wikipedia article shows the front side, the mating side. Both are correct. Binksternet (talk) 14:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

text: Just confirming that Binksternet is correct--both diagrams reflect what any user would see when observing them from the outside, and for both the cable-end-mounted and the panel-mounted variety.  Of course, from the perspective of a repair tech (observing from the inside, where the wires are soldered to the connector) it's exactly what one would--or should--expect to see.  This would be a potentially confusing and totally unneccessary bit of trivia, and shouldn't even be included here, if we humans didn't occasionally forget the obvious, or if users never attempted repairing their own gear, but I've done both (long, long ago, of course)...Ob1-kenogle (talk) 05:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pin out incorrect? 

message: High-end balanced headphone cables use a 4-pin XLR connection to the headphone amplifier. Example: Oppo HA1 http://www.oppodigital.co.uk/eCommerce/ProductImages/ExtraLarge/HA-1%20Headphone%20Amplifier%5E1%5E635322238158220765.Png  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.2.180 (talk) 17:27, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Application: Balanced Headphones 

message: I came here to find what are the pin usage on balanced headphones, stereo, no microphone. I see 4 pins on products, where 5 would make more sense, unless they forgo the ground? Is that OK? I think the article would gain with mention(s) of balanced headphones.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.157.227.130 (talk) 12:41, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pin usage on Balanced headphones? 

message: There's a lot of company promotion going on in this article. Is "Neutrik" really the "most popular brand of XLR connector"? And is that relevant to the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by James M Barlow (talk • contribs) 23:39, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The claim of "most popular" certainly needs a reference, so I added a CN tag. However, complaining that Neutrik is receiving "promotion" here is a little like complaining about "promotion" of the Ford Motor Company in an article on the history of U.S. car manufacturers. Neutrik took a design that had been basically unchanged for decades and fixed several of its problems (not just the little screws). As a result they got a lot of attention, and everyone I know in pro audio prefers their products. Facts that appear to be biased sometimes are just facts. Jeh (talk) 08:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A lot of "Neutrik" promotional stuff in here 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on XLR connector. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111221152445/http://www.etcconnect.com:80/Community/wikis/products/etclink.aspx to http://www.etcconnect.com/Community/wikis/products/etclink.aspx
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111221152501/http://www.etcconnect.com:80/Community/wikis/products/rfu.aspx to http://www.etcconnect.com/Community/wikis/products/rfu.aspx
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130511023107/http://www.etcconnect.com/Community/wikis/products/knowledgebase-xlr-pinout-for-etclink-and-rfu.aspx to http://www.etcconnect.com/Community/wikis/products/knowledgebase-xlr-pinout-for-etclink-and-rfu.aspx
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160206103225/http://www.shure.com/americas/products/accessories/wireless-systems/wireless-systems-cables-connectors to http://www.shure.com/americas/products/accessories/wireless-systems/wireless-systems-cables-connectors
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Could someone please add some info on what exactly the acronym XLR stands for?
Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.131.139.203 (talk) 11:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does XLR stand for? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on XLR connector. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.sterlingaudio.net/products/index.cfm?product=STEC7&modId=0
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160206083827/http://www.switchcraft.com/Category.aspx?Parent=806 to http://www.switchcraft.com/Category.aspx?Parent=806
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141027150424/http://www.switchcraft.com/Specification.aspx to http://www.switchcraft.com/Specification.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The section on Three-pin in audio use should mention that the ubiquitous EIA RS-297 standard states that a positive pressure on the microphone should produce a positive voltage on pin 2. 
References:
Dave Yost (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should mention the EIA RS-297 polarity standard 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on XLR connector. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.soundfirst.com/xlr.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100302151718/http://www.rane.com/par-c.html to http://www.rane.com/par-c.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120910000551/http://sterlingaudio.net/products/index.cfm?product=STEC7&modId=0 to http://www.sterlingaudio.net/products/index.cfm?product=STEC7&modId=0
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:01, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I found this, but I don't know if it is a good reference.  (probably not) Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 22:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, with three-pin mike connectors, extra line return makes more sense than external.  But I don't know what is correct.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 23:32, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  XLR means... 

message: XLR connectors seem to have become a common standard for mechanically connecting "attachments" to "reciprocating machines", if you catch my drift. This seems to be a notable non-electrical use of the connector.
Unfortunately, citing this might be difficult due to the nature of the usage. While there's plenty of product pages to be found – even including an adapter from XLR to pressurised-air quick release (leave one of those in your machine shop to confuse the newbies!) – there's really no articles that discuss this connector usage in a more academic way, besides a Twitter thread or two.
Would this be appropriate to include in the article? TerrorBite (talk) 02:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  XLR as mechanical connector