Buckeye Amps: New US based Hypex multichannel amplifier builder, line-up announcement!

[Buckeye Amps]

Steel binding post tabs/washers on pre-2023 Buckeye amps weren't a problem either until testing proved otherwise.

Well, a measurable problem, not an audible problem.

But in terms of a binding post: $30 a pair to me is way too much for something that will not have any audible improvement over $1 a pair posts.

 

[ryanosaur]

Well, a measurable problem, not an audible problem.

But in terms of a binding post: $30 a pair to me is way too much for something that will not have any audible improvement over $1 a pair posts.

So Cardas is out, huh?

 

[amper42]

Well, a measurable problem, not an audible problem.

But in terms of a binding post: $30 a pair to me is way too much for something that will not have any audible improvement over $1 a pair posts.

Sometimes options are about personal taste. When someone pays $150 more for rack mount or an anodized case it's not because they expect an audible improvement. It could be the same for binding post options. Some of us are willing to pay more than $1 for a copper binding post.

 

[jhaider]

Trying to decide between a change to a new binding post (wouldn’t be until next year, if I go that route).

Which one of the two strikes a fancy?
(Both are robust, mount the same, perform the same)

If you can’t use a modern speaker connector unfortunately (Speakon >>>>>>>>>> any single pole binding post) does anyone still make “Tiffany” style posts like NHT used to use? Solid metal with a hex milled into the top. If one has to settle for binding posts, that’s one to look for.

 

[Rick Sykora]

Trying to decide between a change to a new binding post (wouldn’t be until next year, if I go that route).

Which one of the two strikes a fancy?
(Both are robust, mount the same, perform the same)

How do they differ from a conductive material perspective?

 

[Buckeye Amps]

How do they differ from a conductive material perspective?

Ones gold plated brass, one is nickel plated brass.

 

[Bimbleton]

If all is the same, safety, conductance etc, then right looks classier. Vote right.

 

[restorer-john]

From a reliability and safety perspective, the insulated binding post on the left is the better choice.

There should be no situation where something could come in contact with the output of the amplifier, or easily short circuit it (metal cabinet, wire, an RCA plug faling down the back, an XLR barrel etc, especially high voltage swing amplifiers. The EU LV directorate may also preclude any un-insulated binding posts like the (admittedly cool looking) nickel plated ones.

 

[Rick Sykora]

Ones gold plated brass, one is nickel plated brass.

If the gold plating is substantial (not going to wear off after a few uses), go for the gold!

 

[DonH56]

Steel binding post tabs/washers on pre-2023 Buckeye amps weren't a problem either until testing proved otherwise.

I think we are all well aware of the problems @Buckeye Amps and @Rick Sykora found and fixed. That is a well-understood issue. My concern about the marketing ETI espouses has nothing to do with that, and I do not see how the previous issue is relevant to ETI's marketing (etc.) Here is an excerpt from ETI:

Copper is far superior to Brass in terms of conductivity and as such the BP-20C offers a level of audio signal quality unsurpassed in similarly priced competitor products. If you want a binding post representing outstanding value for money, this is it.

The BP-20C has a Gold Plating applied without any nickel. Many manufacturers apply a nickel surface coating before the Gold Plating as this makes the Gold look shiny. The unfortunate problem is Nickel is a poor conductor and will degrade the Audio Signal!

The Housing is made with Aluminum over a Polymer compound. The Polymer threads onto the Post so as to not have any conductive material touching the Pure Copper. The Aluminum is great at rejecting EM/RF noise that is so prevalent nowadays.

Also, you have the choice of securing the wire by either screw or solder. The Post length is 20mm, which is the preferred length for Chassis mounts or in certain Speaker Back Plates.

The Nut used to secure the BP-20C is made from a high-density non-conductive Polymer, so no conductive material touches the Copper Post, except what is needed to transfer the Audio signal.

Brass has worse conductivity than copper, true, but in the real world there is little difference. Gold also has worse conductivity than copper, for that matter. Nickel is slightly lower than brass, but is much harder, and that is the reason many manufacturers (of many products, like my trumpet) plate with nickel before gold. Copper is soft and nickel provides a hard surface that better resists wear and can help maintain a solid gold plating. Since they gold plate over the copper, or nickel, I question just how much a Ni plate under gold degrades the audio signal.

As for the housing, aluminum is light and has high strength-to-weight ratio, but is weaker than other materials (like steel) for equivalent thickness. Aluminum is nonmagnetic which is helpful in some applications as a shield, but since the housing is not connected to anything (not grounded) it's shielding properties for the length of a binding post are negligible. Especially compared to the much longer runs of (typically) unshielded speaker cable.

I like the idea of high-quality binding posts, and ETI is probably as good as any mechanically, but would like to see proof of their claims especially with respect to audibility.

To put some numbers on it, using 0.25" diameter posts 1" long to approximate a binding post (assuming pure material for the entire post):

So yes, brass is less conductive than copper, and nickel is significantly worse than brass, but the nickel layer is a thin plate (and gold even thinner) so the effective difference is smaller than the pure resistances in the table. And note the resistance of the speaker wires far dominates (by several orders of magnitude) the overall wiring resistance of the system.

 

[thegeton]

I think we are all well aware of the problems @Buckeye Amps and @Rick Sykora found and fixed. That is a well-understood issue. My concern about the marketing ETI espouses has nothing to do with that, and I do not see how the previous issue is relevant to ETI's marketing (etc.) Here is an excerpt from ETI:



Brass has worse conductivity than copper, true, but in the real world there is little difference. Gold also has worse conductivity than copper, for that matter. Nickel is slightly lower than brass, but is much harder, and that is the reason many manufacturers (of many products, like my trumpet) plate with nickel before gold. Copper is soft and nickel provides a hard surface that better resists wear and can help maintain a solid gold plating. Since they gold plate over the copper, or nickel, I question just how much a Ni plate under gold degrades the audio signal.

As for the housing, aluminum is light and has high strength-to-weight ratio, but is weaker than other materials (like steel) for equivalent thickness. Aluminum is nonmagnetic which is helpful in some applications as a shield, but since the housing is not connected to anything (not grounded) it's shielding properties for the length of a binding post are negligible. Especially compared to the much longer runs of (typically) unshielded speaker cable.

I like the idea of high-quality binding posts, and ETI is probably as good as any mechanically, but would like to see proof of their claims especially with respect to audibility.

To put some numbers on it, using 0.25" diameter posts 1" long to approximate a binding post (assuming pure material for the entire post):

View attachment 323433

So yes, brass is less conductive than copper, and nickel is significantly worse than brass, but the nickel layer is a thin plate (and gold even thinner) so the effective difference is smaller than the pure resistances in the table. And note the resistance of the speaker wires far dominates (by several orders of magnitude) the overall wiring resistance of the system.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

I still go back to earlier days on AVS forum where someone tested various different wires AND a coat hanger for use as speaker wiring and showed there was no audible (measurable) difference. An actual coat hanger. Along with simple 2-wire lamp power cord (I think one of them was like 20yrs old of constant use).

 

[Neddy]

I'll speak for those with growing arthritis in the hands - the 'grippier' one on the right would be far easier to grip n turn with my increasing numbness and pain. The plastic ones on the left just say Pain! to me, as the plastic is frequently too slippery to get a good grip on, and all too often have to go get some pliers to 'wrench in' (and scar up).
And, bc, in general, I just prefer metallic looking items, with 'fancy machining', fake or otherwise - but that 'just' aesthetics and MO.
BTW, my Buckeye amp has given me ZERO issues since I got it (~ two years ago now?) - though it does need a good dusting every oncet in a while(st).

 

[thegeton]

BTW, my Buckeye amp has given me ZERO issues since I got it (~ two years ago now?) - though it does need a good dusting every oncet in a while(st).

I have a similar experience: I have 4 Buckeye amps and have had zero issues with any of them. The first of which dates back to March of 2021. Still going strong!

 

[Bimbleton]

I still go back to earlier days on AVS forum where someone tested various different wires AND a coat hanger for use as speaker wiring and showed there was no audible (measurable) difference. An actual coat hanger. Along with simple 2-wire lamp power cord (I think one of them was like 20yrs old of constant use).

Changing my vote to authentic coat hanger-metal binding posts

 

[ryanosaur]

I vote for hardwiring the amp directly to both the Speaker and processor.
There.
Problem solved.



*mischievous grin

 

[Sokel]

I think we are all well aware of the problems @Buckeye Amps and @Rick Sykora found and fixed. That is a well-understood issue. My concern about the marketing ETI espouses has nothing to do with that, and I do not see how the previous issue is relevant to ETI's marketing (etc.) Here is an excerpt from ETI:



Brass has worse conductivity than copper, true, but in the real world there is little difference. Gold also has worse conductivity than copper, for that matter. Nickel is slightly lower than brass, but is much harder, and that is the reason many manufacturers (of many products, like my trumpet) plate with nickel before gold. Copper is soft and nickel provides a hard surface that better resists wear and can help maintain a solid gold plating. Since they gold plate over the copper, or nickel, I question just how much a Ni plate under gold degrades the audio signal.

As for the housing, aluminum is light and has high strength-to-weight ratio, but is weaker than other materials (like steel) for equivalent thickness. Aluminum is nonmagnetic which is helpful in some applications as a shield, but since the housing is not connected to anything (not grounded) it's shielding properties for the length of a binding post are negligible. Especially compared to the much longer runs of (typically) unshielded speaker cable.

I like the idea of high-quality binding posts, and ETI is probably as good as any mechanically, but would like to see proof of their claims especially with respect to audibility.

To put some numbers on it, using 0.25" diameter posts 1" long to approximate a binding post (assuming pure material for the entire post):

View attachment 323433

So yes, brass is less conductive than copper, and nickel is significantly worse than brass, but the nickel layer is a thin plate (and gold even thinner) so the effective difference is smaller than the pure resistances in the table. And note the resistance of the speaker wires far dominates (by several orders of magnitude) the overall wiring resistance of the system.

What about Rhodium,I'm asking for a friend

 

[DonH56]

What about Rhodium,I'm asking for a friend

LOL, I almost added that to the list since it seems to be one of the audiophile darlings... Rhodium has resistivity rho = 4.33e-8 ohm-meter, so worse than the 5% Zn brass I used, but better than nickel.

Electrical resistivity and conductivity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Gold is used for its resistance to oxidation and decent conductivity. It is not the superconductor some marketing would have you believe.

 

[DonH56]

Changing my vote to authentic coat hanger-metal binding posts

Just be sure to get old-school metal hangers. The plastic ones do perform more poorly.

 

[Sokel]

LOL, I almost added that to the list since it seems to be one of the audiophile darlings... Rhodium has resistivity rho = 4.33e-8 ohm-meter, so worse than the 5% Zn brass I used, but better than nickel.

Electrical resistivity and conductivity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The best darlings in the hiend world are platinum,like this:

WBT-0702.12: classic Signature Pole Terminal, Platinum-plated (White) | HIFICollective

WBT-0702.12: classic Signature Pole Terminal, Platinum-plated (White)

www.hificollective.co.uk