- Joined
- May 28, 2020
- Messages
- 2,455
- Likes
- 10,052
The question answered itself, however. Sure it looks nice, but in terms of an measurable, let alone audible, difference...
You can't tell if it is twisted and that's doesn't look like a (gounded) shield. It looks like just a braided tubing to make it look nice.Boxem offers nice shielded cabling with the Arthur 4215/E2 build and quality ETI binding posts.
View attachment 392692
Aren’t they more expensive than Buckeye?Boxem
True I agree especially when amplifiers are out in a living room. I personally like the design from Apollon Audio, Nord and NAD.When I was shopping for another Purifi amp I was looking for quality binding posts like the ETI posts on my March Audio P452. I asked Buckeye if I could pay more for better binding posts. He was unable to accommodate the request so I asked Boxem if they could install ETI Kyro binding posts on their Arthur 4215/E2. Boxem was happy to help. I also wanted the higher gain options offered by Boxem on the 4215/E2. It's nice to be able to find a build with 27dB gain which matches AVR setups a bit better. I also noticed the build inside looked more professional than my Buckeye amps.
To your question, the Boxem ended up costing me $350 more than a Buckeye Purifi but the case was so much nicer, it included the ETI Kyro binding posts and support for higher gain options I wanted. The Boxem build quality is amazing. It was just what I wanted and the few extra dollars were well worth it for me. It's nice to have several sources for Purifi amps so users can get the options they desire.
It was the binding posts, not XLR connectors.I remember that in the first review, the SINAD was lower and it turned out that it was due to bad XLR connectors. How is that even possible? The only way I can think of is added intermittent noise due to loose contact but it should only occur transiently when the cables are moved, not reflect in the steady state measurements.
Also, at the Buckeye amp FAQ it says that RCA to XLR adapters are not recommended and whole cables are preferred for the same reason. Can someone elaborate on that because it kinda contradicts what this forum claims about the fact that cables don't really matter and yet a simple connector in the signal chain could reduce SINAD by 20dB?
Thanks
They are custom manufactured so no big brand name. Same on all amps/models. Brass (non magnetic)Dylan,
What is the brand and model of the new binding posts currently installed on new Buckeye amps? Is it the same binding post on all Buckeye amps sold? What material are they made of? Are they magnetic? Thank you!
It was the binding posts, not XLR connectors.
The original binding posts were ferrous, causing slightly higher distortion. That was rectified quickly. And have since switched to even higher quality binding posts.
I assume that ferrous binding posts combined with the high-frequency PWM currents of the class D amp leads to induced eddy currents which can caused added HF noise ... Interesting. So what about the fact that 90% of speaker binding posts do contain ferromagnetic materials, even high-end Focals where proven to be ferromagnetic... Don't see the point in using non-magnetic posts on the amp side...
Thanks. Auto correct issues apparentlyI think you meant to say "Brass (non magnetic)"
Ultimately it would depend on your use case and your electrical circuit. A single SMPS1200A400 is rated for 1200W rms.Looking at the websites of different manufacturers, it seems that Buckeye and Audiphonics both offer three channel Purifi amps with a single SMPS1200A400 power supply, whilst Nord uses three SMPS1200A400 supplies (one per channel).
Would using a single SMPS1200A400 cause any sort of bottleneck?
It's possibly worth comparing the sustained continuous power output of the PSU. If you think you will exceed that value divided by three, you may choose more PSUs.Looking at the websites of different manufacturers, it seems that Buckeye and Audiphonics both offer three channel Purifi amps with a single SMPS1200A400 power supply, whilst Nord uses three SMPS1200A400 supplies (one per channel).
Would using a single SMPS1200A400 cause any sort of bottleneck?
what do the new vs bad ones look like?So who is getting the one with bad binding posts that requires measurement equipment to discover? QC is something to have.