Different Binding Posts - is it audible?

[Mikko Dee]

When I first got into music, speaker connections were with a screw and the gauge of wire was quite small. I’ve chosen to upgrade the BP’s on my speakers not for any Reason other then I appreciate good design and quality.

 

[maty]

Tube connectors by Gr-Research (Danny Richie)

RMAF: slimmer speaker connector by way of Danny Richie of GR Research

Danny Richie stopped by minutes before closing, making the rounds showing off this replacement for the traditional 5-way binding post used on most speakers and amplifiers. It only supports banana p...

audiofederation.com

More about Tube connectors (Nov 21, 2021)

 

[Martini]

What a load of crap in that video. Danny says that the SpeakOn connector is great, but no good over 200Hz, well then I wonder how the Benchmark AHB2 measures so well. He then rambles on about the price of his connectors compared to the "hi-end" binding post on his table, but fails to mention that the excellent SpeakOn connectors are only $6 a piece. There is just SO much BS in that video, it's just not worth mentioning or even watching.

 

[Martin]

Tube connectors by Gr-Research (Danny Richie)

RMAF: slimmer speaker connector by way of Danny Richie of GR Research

Danny Richie stopped by minutes before closing, making the rounds showing off this replacement for the traditional 5-way binding post used on most speakers and amplifiers. It only supports banana p...

audiofederation.com

View attachment 167632
View attachment 167636
View attachment 167641


More about Tube connectors (Nov 21, 2021)

Where is the dislike / thumbs-down button?

No - it is NOT audible - move on...

 

[Shazb0t]

Tube connectors by Gr-Research (Danny Richie)

RMAF: slimmer speaker connector by way of Danny Richie of GR Research

Danny Richie stopped by minutes before closing, making the rounds showing off this replacement for the traditional 5-way binding post used on most speakers and amplifiers. It only supports banana p...

audiofederation.com

Snake oil.

 

[headshake]

Snake oil.

Snake man.

 

[Mikko Dee]

McIntosh quite a few years ago went around the country to dispel a lot of this BS. Notice no major manufacturers have done that since… even PS Audio sells a bunch of snake oil type crap. To each his own and if you don’t do some independent research, then I suppose it’s your money being wasted. Since joining this site.. I’ve had my eyes opened and subsequently sold a lot of stuff that I thought was improving my system.

This ain’t the place for Stereophonic Dogma for sure….

 

[Katji]

Where is the dislike / thumbs-down button?

No - it is NOT audible - move on...

Yes, I'm going to move on by unfollowing this thread.
If there is any possibility, ever, that there are audible differences in speaker connectors, it's beyond my capabilities anyway.

 

[enioentity]

I was wondering/worrying about binding posts having losses being brass. Now i see there is nothing to worry about. We need this kind of threads to avoid paying money for snake oil stuff..

 

[Martini]

I will rant on just a little bit more about Danny Richie's "Tube connectors" video. These connectors are nothing other than banana plugs with the female side being dedicated to that connection, nothing more. At least with the standard 5-way binding post, you have four other connection options. The assertion that when assembled the wire extend to the tip of the connector and that this is beneficial to the sound somehow, is absurd. That the tips of the two wires are almost touching means nothing; once the crimp or solder joint is made, the whole connector becomes conductive. But if in his mindless magic world, somehow the wire tips being close to each other makes a difference, we would have to assume the connectors are insulated from the wire itself. Thus, the two wires would benefit from close proximity to each other by arcing, assuming the current is high enough. Personally, I would think a spark-plug would make a damn noisy binding post. If he believes the non-sense in his video, then he's an idiot. If not, then he's just a snake oil salesman trying to deceive people.

 

[gp4Jesus]

I was wondering/worrying about binding posts having losses being brass. Now i see there is nothing to worry about. We need this kind of threads to avoid paying money for snake oil stuff..

I learned recently that brass has about 1/4 the conductivity of copper. This thread suggests any “copper vs brass” mental anguish should be “left by the side of the road” as the diff is way too small to “knot up the knickers.” SQ?

I mention this as, unexpectedly from two experiences taught me to maximize conductivity from the amp to the drivers as practicably as possible. One, better connections at the speakers produces better results all around. The other, as another mentioned, low impedance loads* even band** limited demand LARGE cables as short as possible.
*3.2 ohms
**subs EXO’d @ 80 hz

In my Tri-amp tower project I used huge Dayton gold plated brass BPs for all drivers. I used 8 gage wire for the twin woofers, each getting their own BPs, amp connections, and channel. Inside I soldered either to the drivers or big spades that are then connected tightly to the interior side of the BPs. I used higher quality 10 ga for the mids that I paid for the vendor* to pre-term one end w/their spades & ~15 ga for the tweeters maintaining the same thought process as the woofers. It all added up to higher output compared to originally.
*Blue Jeans

Thanks for reading this far. Tony

 

[ctrl]

I learned recently that brass has about 1/4 the conductivity of copper. This thread suggests any “copper vs brass” mental anguish should be “left by the side of the road” as the diff is way too small to “knot up the knickers.” SQ?

If you have learned this, then it is only a small step to calculate the differences when using different material (or "quality") of BP and different cable diameter and length - there are online calculators for this, so you don't even have to learn the theory.

Let's consider, for fun, the effect of using iron instead of copper on a BP. We assume that the contact area of the BPs is identical and so large that this has no decisive influence.

Let's assume that the BP has a length of 5cm and a cross-sectional area of 2.5mm² (this corresponds to standard speaker cable):

R=ρ*l/A

R [Ω] resistance
ρ [Ωmm²/m] resistivity
l [m] cable length
A [mm²] Wire cross-section

p copper 0.018 Ωmm²/m
p iron about 0.12 Ωmm²/m

Iron has about seven times higher resistivity than copper - so an extremely poor material for our BP.
So for our copper BP we get a resistance of 0.36mΩ and that of the iron BP is about 2.5mΩ.

For comparison, an extremely thick 6mm² and with 3m very short copper speaker cable has a resistance of 9mΩ.
A more realistic comparison would be a 4mm² speaker cable with 6m length, which would have a resistance of 27mΩ.
Many will use only 2.5mm² speaker cable, or even smaller cross-sectional area, then we would already be >40mΩ.

Now everyone must decide for themselves how much money to spend on BP and speaker cables, and how much to value the possible effect.
In the realistic example, 4mm² speaker cable with 6m length, even if iron nails are used as BP, the resistance deteriorates only by 10% (compared to copper BP).

 

[gp4Jesus]

Different binding posts - audible?

Well… for sure, lowering connection* resistance* can and does increase volume for even modest systems. (NAD 45WPC amp) or a pair of dual driver subwoofers.
*better connections at both ends of heavier gauge cable is a 1-2-3 punch to less loss.

1. When I rewired* & upgraded to banana jacks**, one speaker at a time - OH YES! I had to set the balance ~10am or 2pm depending upon the channel connection. Of course, completing the upgrades on the other speaker restored the balance.
*from “sewing thread” to 12 gauge OFC
**from lame, cheap spring load tiny surface contact

2. I offer the before and after calculated speaker cable resistance as the explanation for the change. This was to connect a pair of low impedance, reactive dual driver subwoofers. From single cable to half length bi-wired.

0.019978 before
0.0049945 after final calculated cable resistance

0.0149835 difference

What I KNOW: three weeks of dialing the system went out the window because “post mod,” they were UNEXPECTEDLY louder!

Mind you #1 was over 40 years ago. #2 was over 30 years ago. Any sort of readings some NEED to support my claims are out of the question.

I’ll wait for tomatoes behind a M1 Abrams tank hull.

Tony

 

[test1223]

Hello,

I want to bring up a different perspective of binding posts. The electrical properties where very well tested here and form only this point of view all binding posts should be the same.

But there is also the acoustic behavior of the binding post terminal. These plastic cup like terminals are not good in this regard. The relatively thin plastic should contribute to the transmission of sound form the inside of the box to the outside. Like membrane cone of a driver and bass reflex port this is a weak spot of a speaker in therms of unwanted transmission of sound from inside of the box. Of cause this is not a severe issue since the area is small and the plastic is more solid than the membrane cone and it is typical placed on the back side of the enclosure, but if you build a nice enclosure, I would avoid these plastic cup binding posts.

 

[egellings]

If there are differences in the sound of binding posts, they are likely to be so microscopic in size that they will be vastly below any level that the most sensitive human ears can detect. Much ado about nothing.

 

[Speedskater]

If there are differences in the sound of binding posts, they are likely to be so microscopic in size that they will be vastly below any level that the most sensitive human ears can detect. Much ado about nothing.

Not only difficult to hear, difficult to measure!
The resistance change of the entire loop: cable >> terminal >> loudspeaker >> terminal >> cable
Is just about zero.

 

[egellings]

When you look at all the series resistances in cables, voice coils & x-over components and the source impedances of amplifiers, such tiny essentially invisible resistances are simply not an issue.

 

[Katji]

Thanks for that! Now bindng posts* "have a sound" too! ...Keep it up, soon we get people arriving with like "Many people say..."


*wtf can't they be called connectors?!

 

[test1223]

Thanks for that! Now bindng posts* "have a sound" too! ...Keep it up, soon we get people arriving with like "Many people say..."


*wtf can't they be called connectors?!

Sound transmission through parts of the enclosure is definitely an issues which was documented and researched since the very early age of electro acoustics. The transmission line effects was discovered this way. The attempt was to reduce the sound transmission of the reflections inside the box though the chassie.

As I wrote the issue of a small plastic part is not that important but none of the less it will be a weak spot. If it can be perceived depends on many side conditions.

You obviously don't need an expensive connector

 

[gp4Jesus]

But there is also the acoustic behavior of the binding post. These plastic cup like posts are not good in this regard. The relatively thin plastic should contribute to the transmission of sound form the inside of the box to the outside.

Are you talking about THE binding post itself or the piece, often plastic*, to which the binding posts are mounted?
*on less expensive models

“Like [the]membrane…”

What’s the membrane?