atcomsystems.ca/forum Forums General General Telephone & Systems Information Adapter Assistance RJ9 Convertor

Greeting!

I'm hoping to source some assistance from this friendly forum. I have purchased a great headset with a USB plug for my computer use. This works very well and outperforms my current RJ9 headset used for my telephone. I'm hoping that an adapter exists so that I can use my USB headset with my phone that has the RJ9 plug.

Does an adapter exists to convert a female RJ9 to female USB? (I need a male RJ9 to female USB adapter). Or are there any other suggests to achieve the result I'm after.

Thank you.

Welcome! We're here to help!

There is no such thing as an "RJ9" in our industry.

With that said, please Google the term "RJ9" and you will get a half-million or so hits. Many of them offer adapters of the type you seek.

After you get what you need, and if you want to join us in learning more about the Registered Jack program, please come back and we'll do what we love best: teaching new members all about telephony.

Here's the first lesson: the male plug at the end of a handset cord, and the mating female connector, each with 4 conductors in a modular form factor, are officially called "4P4C" (4 position 4 contact). The "RJ" designations refer to a federally-mandated program that codifies direct connectivity between telephone equipment and the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network.) Since headsets do not, directly, connect to the PSTN, they do not use "RJ" plugs or connectors.

C L I C K

Do you ever use a Crescent wrench or Channel-lock pliers?
Hopw about a 5pin DIN connector?
Why can't we accept that some specific terms are used generically. I don't think that nitpicking a nomencalture is the best first impression to a brand new member.
I understand there is a Correct term and that we, in the industry, should be aware of the correct usage, but the generic term has come into common usage as to be equally identifiable by us and the general masses.

What I would love to know is how the term RJ9 came to be.

Bill, I'm sure that someone just picked it out of thin air, just like the use of "RJ45" for Ethernet connections. That's the problem; incorrect terminology or nomenclature can make for a world of mess if taken literally.

Can you imagine what would happen if you really installed RJ45 jacks on cables for your customer? Hey, that's what they asked for, right?

I've brought this up many times before regarding handset cord connections. While many use the traditional two wires for transmit and two for receive, what about dial-in-handset phones, like at&t's Trimline? That one currently uses three wires; two for the tip/ring and one for the ringer. What kind of RJ9 would that be?

See, there simply isn't any uniform standard for handset connections, so it is impossible for there to be correct (or incorrect) nomenclature for them. There most assuredly cannot ever be an RJ designation.

As it's been said to Google it. The problem you'll run into is if your headset require a 5 volt feed (which your phone likely wouldn't supply). As Ed said, each phone is different so it will be more of trial and error to find an adapter that works.

Either way, your best result will likely come from a professional grade headset from a company like Plantronics.

With all that has been said about "calling it the right thing", I can't say the last time I asked my local supply house (with 30 locations across 6 states) for 8P8C and actually got anything more than "What?". Don't feel bad because I have to use the genericized names for tools or material. When's the last time someone asked for 12/2 non-metallic sheathed electrical cable? Most of us know it as Romex regardless of the brand.

So, after taking in all of that you might want to start HERE.

Google is your friend. You are looking for USB to telephone handset adapters. Keep in mind that all telephones are not the same. Handsets differ electrically from one to another even though they may look the same and use the same curley cord and the same plugs. (Notice I didn't call them RJ-9s ) Because handsets often aren't interchangeable, it's important to realize that whatever adapter you choose needs to be made to work with your particular phone.

-Hal

I do not feel that my answer deserves to be negatively criticized, either for tone or content. Perhaps before getting your shorts in a twist, you might re-read it.

That said, and this is directed to existing members of this forum, I refuse to perpetuate wrong information, when perfectly good correct information is available. Yes, I feel strongly about right and wrong. I'm just an old-fashioned guy, I guess.

The RJ designation refers to the WIRING SCHEME of the plug/connector combination, not the PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES of the hardware. Our RJ problem is similar to the way that "RS232" (a wiring standard) has become conflated with "D-connector" (a specific form-factor).

Your examples are irrelevant. You cite trademarks that have, to the chagrin of the original owners who did not protect them, crossed over into the public domain. Since there never was a trademark called RJ9 in real life, it can't have become "common usage." It is a fiction.

"Common usage" ??? Then please explain what an "RJ10" or an "RJ22" is. Should we just keep adding more fictitious RJ numbers for handset jacks, until we run out of numbers?

Speaking of mis-information that is our responsibility, as experts, to correct, how about "handset" for telephone set, or "PBX" for key system, or "bell" for ringer, or "speaker" for receiver unit, or "cable" for wire (and vice-versa) or "rotary" for dial, or ...

I suspect that you are talking about Graybar who nowadays caters to sparkies. So I hardly think what they have to say is authoritive for this industry.

And by the way, I always ask for NM at my supply house (not Graybar) just to keep them on their toes.

-Hal

Well we've pretty well summed this up. Let's see if we've helped the OP or not. I have no problem with someone pointing out the correct industry terms, just as long as it's done with courtesy and respect to the poster and that seems to be the case here.

I agree with Arthur. The telephone industry is rife with all kinds of anachronisms. If we were to list them, it would fill several pages. The careless use of terms causes confusion. There are actual "standards" in this industry and we would all be well served if we made a conscious effort to use them instead of "slang" shorthand.

By the way, the "jacks" used on telephone equipment do have specific designators. I may be wrong, but I think Allen-Tel may have been the first to catalog the nomenclature (e.g. 42C 4 terminal screw block; 616B and 616W for the handset jack, etc.) The use of "RJ" anything is a reference to a USOC code first implemented by the FCC Part 68, CFR 42 FR 36459 Vol X. In that document you will see everything that Arthur explained to be "spot on" and accurate.

Rcaman