Speaker cable binding posts

[kenreau]

Ok, I think 'maybe' I've got this pic thing figured out so I'll make a post out of it related to the recent binding post thread and some of the tools I use for such things. Most important and oft-used audio tool in my arsenal is the Panasonic EY 7411 3.6V Li-ion cordless torque-setting screwdriver. EJ Sarmento, designer for Cullen Circuits and later/currently Wyred 4 Sound introduced me to this tool almost 8 years ago. I purchased one immediately and it has been in use at least 3-4 times a week ever since. Damn thing's bullet-proof! Also the most accurate, repeatable and ergonomically friendly tool ever!

An interesting aside to using Torque settings for assembly, especially with high-end outlets like GTX-D's etc is they are far, FAR better damped, effective and seriously better sounding when torqued equally at both ends than when guesstimated. Not guess-work on my part, I've seen & heard that result first-hand at RMAF on an oscilloscope.

Enuf dawdling, now for the pic test...

**EDIT** YES, YES, YES I did it... FINALLY!!!

Thanks for the tip on the Panasonic, I have been looking for something similar for some time.  I can also see applications using it on speaker drivers, bicycles and motorcycles as well.

[Manoet]

    After a little more research into the OEM binding posts I've discovered many things and I'm afraid none of them very flattering. Tho now I'm able to easily see & understand why some have found significantly enhanced SQ by eliminating parts from the posts as delivered from the factory.

At initial glance the OEM binding post would appear to consist of just two parts, ie; a screw-together head & tailpiece. Each of those transitions creating another unnecessary, by today's design standards increase in signal/current resistance. An utter impossibility with the likes of F'tech, WBT, Cardas et al with one-piece conductors regardless of conductor or surrounding body metal. Closer inspection reveals an inner ring which doubles resistance again due to separate in & out transitions. Under 40X magnification I've also discovered the internal spade terminal to not be one-piece as I originally thought but actually a reflow oven-soldered spade into the post head section. Reflow soldering is a process in which a solder paste (a sticky mixture of powdered solder and flux) is used to temporarily attach one or several electrical components to their contact pads, after which the entire assembly is subjected to controlled heat, which melts the solder, permanently connecting the joint. Now we're up to 4 resistance-creating transitions total. And just when you thought it couldn't possibly get any worse that split ring is gold-plated STEEL... Yep, ferromagnetic!! A HUGE no-no inside a binding post! Oh, but wait, it gets better yet! To top it off the entire binding post is lightly ferromagnetic! That is to say unlike the split ring which will jump to a small Neodymium magnet from... over 50mm away all other parts of the brass binding post can also be made to move with a Neo magnet individually or assembled from 4-6mm away! That can only come a from a single cause... brass contaminated with iron. No other way! You simply cannot make 'pure' brass magnetic... its the law!! BTW anyone can easily confirm my findings on ALL pieces with a magnet. In fairness I have seen light magnetic attraction in other binding posts with nickel plating as nickel is ferromagnetic. But seeing it in non-plated brass is a first for me!

So now we all have binding posts with 4 resistance-causing transitions containing steel parts and encased in 'dirty' ferromagnetic brass. Could things possibly get any worse!?! Well lets compare brass to copper conductivity-wise. As the chart below shows, brass has ~28% the conductivity of copper. However the more important part of that is that brass is 72% LESS conductive than copper!

Without belaboring the point further I'll simply leave you with what others have found to be true. That there is SQ improvement in simply reducing part-count in the OEM binding posts. The steel split ring due to ferromagnetic composition and a double in/out resistance transition should be the first to go. All you'll lose is the increased mechanical reistance at end of thread. Next up would be losing the binding-post tail if using banana terminations. You'll lose some slight damping qualities but due to the Devialet inherent rear panel rigidity likely more than compensate for it due to reduced resistance AND ferromagnetic interference.

Below is a metals conductivity chart where you can see exactly how much signal/current you might be losing compared to other choices available.

The differences in electrical conductivity of various materials used in electrical products are often not well understood. Making assumptions about the electrical conductivity of a material because it looks similar to another conductive material of known ampacity can lead to disastrous results.
Perhaps the most common form of this error is the substitution of brass or bronze for copper in electrical applications. Brass is only 28% as conductive as copper. Some bronzes are as low as 7% as conductive as copper!
Copper is the standard by which electrical materials are rated and conductivity ratings are expressed as a relative measurement to copper. These ratings will frequently be expressed as "28 IACS". IACS is the abbreviation for International Annealed Copper Standard and the number preceding "IACS" is the percentage of conductivity a material has relative to copper, which is considered to be 100% conductive. This does not mean that copper has no resistance (is 100% conductive in an absolute sense), but rather that it is the standard by which other materials are measured. The higher the % IACS, the more conductive the material is. This standard refers to a pure, "standard" copper having a resistivity of 1.7241 microhm-cm at 20°C (68°F).
Armed with this knowledge it is interesting to examine the IACS conductivity values of some common materials.

Material IACS % Conductivity
Silver 105
Copper 100
Gold 70
Aluminum 61
Nickel 22
Zinc 27
Brass 28
Iron 17
Tin 15
Phosphor Bronze 15
Lead 7
Nickel Aluminum Bronze 7
Steel 3 to 15

[Manoet]

I've just blown past the 96 hours, continuous use mark with the WBT 0710 fine silver speaker binding posts. Incidentally the same ones I use on my speakers. Truth is I was blown away instantly but knew from previous experience to bide my time, wait for 72-96 hours as they tend to blossom and sweeten in a few days. This time however I've heard no significant improvement since Saturday morning. In fact it was so good immediately I was floored! Far greater than ANY binding post in the past. Coupled with my findings last night and this morning I'm hardly surprised. Getting rid of four separate & individually powered EMI generators shooting interference up & downstream of the OEM binding posts will have that kind of effect! Its like a whole new system and was that way immediately. I honestly believe removing the old binding posts to be of far greater significance than any new ones I could've added. Sadly no way to confirm it as you have to replace them with 'something' then you're stuck with the same paradox yet again.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear of people who've replaced existing speaker cables with better speaker cables and maybe hearing some measure of improvement but nowhere near the net result they were expecting. Same could likely be said even of adding new/different speakers. I also have no way of knowing how extensive this contaminated brass is. The contaminated OEM posts are really bad, no, I mean really, Really, REALLY bad! Poorly executed with a steel split ring and grossly inappropriate metallurgy. I can't imagine how that passed QC at the factory. Who buys iron-impregnated brass!?! Is it their attempt at a ferrite bead or choke? Did no one check the brass for iron content or magnetism!?! Shooting EMI down every speaker cable outside the box and scattering magnetic interference inside the rear access cover throughout the cabinet is simply unforgivable. Its really no wonder the people at the beginning of this thread found such improvement with removing various pieces of the OEM binding posts as every one of those individual parts & pieces is a contributing factor that compounds/exaggerates the problem. They've basically built inverted electro magnets running current thru a ferrite-contaminated brass core instead of running current around a ferrite rod. The perfect EMI generator!

Now I wonder how extensively this issue runs? How much ferrite-infused brass is out there? Is it in every Devialet binding post made, purchased from an untrustworthy vendor? Chinese perhaps? Was it just cheaper than pure brass so they took the "let's jump on it approach?" I mean they obviously purpose-chose a steel split ring for the tailpiece. Are they that inept? Uncaring? I'm just mortified and stymied.

In short I can't report on a simple speaker binding post replacement. I will tell you instead I have an entirely new system and I love it... but just a LOT!!

[mauidan]

Manoet,

What did you use to measure the EMI that you claim the stock binding posts are generating?

BTW, I hope someone Devialet reads your posts and responses to your questions:

"Are they that inept? Uncaring?"

[Manoet]

Sadly, no tools for measuring EMI but a rather good understanding of why ferromagnetic materials should NEVER be used in a binding post. If I had an EMI measuring tool I'd be busy for a month!

[Mikeeo]

I've just blown past the 96 hours, continuous use mark with the WBT 0710 fine silver speaker binding posts. Incidentally the same ones I use on my speakers. Truth is I was blown away instantly but knew from previous experience to bide my time, wait for 72-96 hours as they tend to blossom and sweeten in a few days. This time however I've heard no significant improvement since Saturday morning. In fact it was so good immediately I was floored! Far greater than ANY binding post in the past. Coupled with my findings last night and this morning I'm hardly surprised. Getting rid of four separate & individually powered EMI generators shooting interference up & downstream of the OEM binding posts will have that kind of effect! Its like a whole new system and was that way immediately. I honestly believe removing the old binding posts to be of far greater significance than any new ones I could've added. Sadly no way to confirm it as you have to replace them with 'something' then you're stuck with the same paradox yet again.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear of people who've replaced existing speaker cables with better speaker cables and maybe hearing some measure of improvement but nowhere near the net result they were expecting. Same could likely be said even of adding new/different speakers. I also have no way of knowing how extensive this contaminated brass is. The contaminated OEM posts are really bad, no, I mean really, Really, REALLY bad! Poorly executed with a steel split ring and grossly inappropriate metallurgy. I can't imagine how that passed QC at the factory. Who buys iron-impregnated brass!?! Is it their attempt at a ferrite bead or choke? Did no one check the brass for iron content or magnetism!?! Shooting EMI down every speaker cable outside the box and scattering magnetic interference inside the rear access cover throughout the cabinet is simply unforgivable. Its really no wonder the people at the beginning of this thread found such improvement with removing various pieces of the OEM binding posts as every one of those individual parts & pieces is a contributing factor that compounds/exaggerates the problem. They've basically built inverted electro magnets running current thru a ferrite-contaminated brass core instead of running current around a ferrite rod. The perfect EMI generator!

Now I wonder how extensively this issue runs? How much ferrite-infused brass is out there? Is it in every Devialet binding post made, purchased from an untrustworthy vendor? Chinese perhaps? Was it just cheaper than pure brass so they took the "let's jump on it approach?" I mean they obviously purpose-chose a steel split ring for the tailpiece. Are they that inept? Uncaring? I'm just mortified and stymied.

In short I can't report on a simple speaker binding post replacement. I will tell you instead I have an entirely new system and I love it... but just a LOT!!

Manoet,

Thanks for your findings and experience as this has trigged me to try as well. 
These magnetic issue may just be a factor of a very thick nickel coating which is the 'std' glue metal for a gold coating for these purposes as well as get a very shiny and smooth surface of the gold coating. Cut it and put it into an scanning electron microscope to measure both thicknesses of the coatings and have elemental analysis (EDS).
Without going into a long story I share many of your findings when it comes to plugs/connectors etc which had me change them many times on even very expensive gear with astounding positive results. Why do they do this? Either it is design philosophy, and I do not care, or hear a difference, OR just cost effectiveness, and why not both!
In my previous life I worked a lot for the semi conductor industry looking at materials interaction and making sub atomic surfaces etc...there is a lot going on.... and now I do biotech instead relaxing with music and the never ending quest for the 'perfect' music making gear!

Keep it coming/Mike

[Manoet]

Mike- Thank you and somehow your nickel-underplating makes perfect sense. In fact FAR more sense than my "dirty/contaminated" brass perspective. Same net effect tho yours is more palatable and I suspect, correct. I had mentioned earlier today some nickel-plated binding posts I have around from who knows when or where but they were horrible! Stay near on this... we can use you!

[mauidan]

Sadly, no tools for measuring EMI but a rather good understanding of why ferromagnetic materials should NEVER be used in a binding post. If I had an EMI measuring tool I'd be busy for a month!

I have a rather good understanding of the golf swing, but that doesn't make me a scratch golfer.

Without an EMI probe, I'd be very careful claiming the stock binding posts are generating levels of EMI high enough to affect sound quality.

I'm not questioning that you're hearing a difference, but IMO, it maybe just the difference between silver and gold plated brass.

I'll try and borrow my friend's probe kit.

[Manoet]

I concur but there's other important snippets omitted. The original posters that initially wrote about this and benefitted did so without benefit of high-end, single-piece silver conductors embedded in non-conductive binding post housings or even knowledge of ferromagnetic binding posts. What was it they were hearing since we know it wasn't silver? They simply started eliminating OEM gold and likely nickel-plated binding post parts and felt strongly SQ was enhanced. While not conclusive, a rather remarkable accomplishment for removing only totally inert & innocuous parts incapable of generating at least some measure of EMI. I struggle understanding how removing totally magnetic & ferromagnetic parts in combination can enhance SQ yet shouldn't be considered that EMI or more aptly a lack thereof isn't the primary cause or at least a contributing factor!?! The only place I see SQ enhancement coming from in this situation is specifically related to reduced EMI as gold over nickel-plated brass on a ferromagnetic binding post with steel split ring is to EMI what dark & damp is to fungus. They both thrive in those respective environments... the perfect storm. And while EMI is certainly not guaranteed in this case, my gut level instinct, due to those earlier SQ results and more current findings remains with it in 1st place suspect-wise. If it looks like a duck, waddles & quacks, I tend to see 'duck'... least till convinced otherwise. I suspect EMI will be BIG and hope you can make those measurements happen. And if we get to the bottom of it and EMI isn't a player I'm ok with that too as I believe there's gold (or is that silver) in them thar hills just laying around for the pickin and many will benefit directly. I want the enhancement without regard to how/why beyond a healthy curiosity. I'm heavily invested in it time-wise and want to see it though. I feel we're closer to that at this juncture than any time previously.

[kenreau]

I've just blown past the 96 hours, continuous use mark with the WBT 0710 fine silver speaker binding posts. Incidentally the same ones I use on my speakers. Truth is I was blown away instantly but knew from previous experience to bide my time, wait for 72-96 hours as they tend to blossom and sweeten in a few days. This time however I've heard no significant improvement since Saturday morning. In fact it was so good immediately I was floored! Far greater than ANY binding post in the past. Coupled with my findings last night and this morning I'm hardly surprised. Getting rid of four separate & individually powered EMI generators shooting interference up & downstream of the OEM binding posts will have that kind of effect! Its like a whole new system and was that way immediately. I honestly believe removing the old binding posts to be of far greater significance than any new ones I could've added. Sadly no way to confirm it as you have to replace them with 'something' then you're stuck with the same paradox yet again...

...In short I can't report on a simple speaker binding post replacement. I will tell you instead I have an entirely new system and I love it... but just a LOT!!

I'm digging your efforts, Manoet!  I'm going to order the WBT 0708 Ag binding posts tomorrow and plan to use them with my new AQ 1000 silver plated bananas.

Thx
Kenreau