optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624 
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 20, 2021 15:16:42 GMT
The art of taking a signal from power amplifier to speaker cone/driver/panel can be a complicated minefield. Connectors of high/low mass, different material, copper, brass, screws/nuts all in the signal path, can cause degradation to the signal, some audible some likely not, but maintaining the purity of the signal whilst not adding any extra unnecessary material is the goal here. The simplest and most stripped back solution would be to have your chosen speaker cable crimped (or even fused if we're going mega high end) to the output terminals of the power amplifier. Then an unbroken (signal-wise) speaker cable would be crimped/fused to the input terminals of the speakers crossover or indeed directly to the driver, assuming it's one running full range. Whilst this solution would provide the 'least loss' (and therefore 'best') of signal for the speakers, it really is not practical. So, what's the next best alternative. Find the highest purity copper connector, with the least mass. This looks to be an excellent solution and takes the elements outlined above for what is in reality not a lot of outlay. www.gr-research.com/store/p44/Electra_Cable_Tube_Connectors.htmlI'm seriously weighing up redoing my speaker binding posts as well as my power amp ones with these. A very elegant solution indeed which scientifically makes a lot of sense. A very interesting video on the matter here. |
|
|
|
Post by rexton on Dec 20, 2021 15:43:57 GMT
The best solution to be optimal is to solder direct to the XO, hardwire, and then remove your terminals altogether. This removes all the bollocks about should I buy this, that, or the other brand. Job done!!
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 20, 2021 16:05:09 GMT
I have done the experiment of soldering the entire system together, and whilst it does work incredibly well, it's not necessary. I tried multiple connections after settling on the then used Viborg pure copper gold plated bananas, then set about terminals. phonomac recommended to try these: www.hificollective.co.uk/binding_posts/cmc-858lcu-gold-plated-long-speaker-terminals.htmlThe big difference between all of the binding posts I tried, (all gold played copper, not brass or "high copper content from CMC, KLE, Cardas etc) was fluidity. The only ones that came close to "no connection" was the CMC I linked to and the MPS pioneer RCAs. In fact, I'd say the fact you can used the screw terminal is to be coveted too. There are reasons for that, but YMMV |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 20, 2021 17:07:28 GMT
I have done the experiment of soldering the entire system together, and whilst it does work incredibly well, it's not necessary. I tried multiple connections after settling on the then used Viborg pure copper gold plated bananas, then set about terminals. phonomac recommended to try these: www.hificollective.co.uk/binding_posts/cmc-858lcu-gold-plated-long-speaker-terminals.htmlThe big difference between all of the binding posts I tried, (all gold played copper, not brass or "high copper content from CMC, KLE, Cardas etc) was fluidity. The only ones that came close to "no connection" was the CMC I linked to and the MPS pioneer RCAs. In fact, I'd say the fact you can used the screw terminal is to be coveted too. There are reasons for that, but YMMV Yeah they are about the best if what was/is available for a sensible outlay I'm being swayed by the low mass argument though. Using solid theory these should be better. I know it's not a huge amount of material the signal is passing through and may not make an audible difference, but less amount of exactly the same material is always going to be technically better. If audible.... We shall see. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 20, 2021 17:10:06 GMT
I have done the experiment of soldering the entire system together, and whilst it does work incredibly well, it's not necessary. I tried multiple connections after settling on the then used Viborg pure copper gold plated bananas, then set about terminals. phonomac recommended to try these: www.hificollective.co.uk/binding_posts/cmc-858lcu-gold-plated-long-speaker-terminals.htmlThe big difference between all of the binding posts I tried, (all gold played copper, not brass or "high copper content from CMC, KLE, Cardas etc) was fluidity. The only ones that came close to "no connection" was the CMC I linked to and the MPS pioneer RCAs. In fact, I'd say the fact you can used the screw terminal is to be coveted too. There are reasons for that, but YMMV Yeah they are about the best if what was/is available for a sensible outlay I'm being swayed by the low mass argument though. Using solid theory these should be better. I know it's not a huge amount of material the signal is passing through and may not make an audible difference, but less amount of exactly the same material is always going to be technically better. If audible.... We shall see. That hasn't been my experience. |
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Dec 20, 2021 17:17:32 GMT
Those could be ideal for the back of my 286.
|
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Dec 20, 2021 21:16:09 GMT
Speakons.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 20, 2021 22:32:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by electronumpty on Dec 21, 2021 0:05:11 GMT
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 6:38:15 GMT
"Mother glared at me from across the table, with all the subtlety of a speakon connection" - Pride & Prejudice |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 7:52:34 GMT
Okay, let me try this again . . . If you watch the video from 10:20 it describes what this 'binding tube' is and how it works. I'm not really asking 'what's the best binding post' (in your opinion) more a - have you seen/tried/considered THIS design specifically? This illustration also shows what is going on with the design.  Logically this design does seem better than whats currently out there. If you haven't tried it, how will you know? Are there other low-mass designs that maintain the minimal proximity of the speaker wire to the input terminal via a pure copper tube? |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 21, 2021 9:21:35 GMT
Jesus......... think of the children!!! |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 21, 2021 9:22:26 GMT
Okay, let me try this again . . . If you watch the video from 10:20 it describes what this 'binding tube' is and how it works. I'm not really asking 'what's the best binding post' (in your opinion) more a - have you seen/tried/considered THIS design specifically? This illustration also shows what is going on with the design. Logically this design does seem better than whats currently out there. If you haven't tried it, how will you know? Are there other low-mass designs that maintain the minimal proximity of the speaker wire to the input terminal via a pure copper tube? Must admit, I didn't look at the vid....I was in bed with Covid 😭 |
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Dec 21, 2021 9:24:20 GMT
I can't see what the proximity of the speaker wire has to do with anything?
The actual low ohmic connection is afforded where the wires are crimped in the tubes surely?
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 9:31:59 GMT
I can't see what the proximity of the speaker wire has to do with anything? The actual low ohmic connection is afforded where the wires are crimped in the tubes surely? I see what you mean but as in the illustration if the wire is 'pressed' up against the end of the tube and the receiving wire is also surely the signal would be all the better for it? I don't have the understanding of whether the crimping further away from this negates the positives of the speaker wires being so close to each other. Still trying to get my head around conductors/materials and properties/behavior thereof. |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 9:32:43 GMT
Okay, let me try this again . . . If you watch the video from 10:20 it describes what this 'binding tube' is and how it works. I'm not really asking 'what's the best binding post' (in your opinion) more a - have you seen/tried/considered THIS design specifically? This illustration also shows what is going on with the design. Logically this design does seem better than whats currently out there. If you haven't tried it, how will you know? Are there other low-mass designs that maintain the minimal proximity of the speaker wire to the input terminal via a pure copper tube? Must admit, I didn't look at the vid....I was in bed with Covid 😭 Nooooooooo . . . . hope you recover quickly. Awful luck there mate. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 21, 2021 9:39:34 GMT
Must admit, I didn't look at the vid....I was in bed with Covid 😭 Nooooooooo . . . . hope you recover quickly. Awful luck there mate. I can't believe it. Bloody typical. Anyway, I'll watch the video whilst soaking in the hot tub. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 21, 2021 9:41:21 GMT
This might matter with a very low-level signal like from a cartridge, but not from a high level signal amp to speaker.
Even a crappy connection, as long as it's tight, will deliver full signal to the speaker.
I'm all in favour of optimising everything, but your not going to get any audible improvement unless you have a dodgy connection at the moment. Which you'd notice if you had.
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 9:50:39 GMT
This might matter with a very low-level signal like from a cartridge, but not from a high level signal amp to speaker. Even a crappy connection, as long as it's tight, will deliver full signal to the speaker. I'm all in favour of optimising everything, but your not going to get any audible improvement unless you have a dodgy connection at the moment. Which you'd notice if you had. That might be true, I fully concede that could well be the case. BUT, I am hearing so much more detail through these speaker cables (Acoustic Revive), it's tiny cues and micro details which I had no idea were there. This is the result of chasing higher purity/better constructed conductivity within the speaker cable, so logically removing any potential signal degradation between amp and speakers, is something I need to investigate. Swapping out these speaker cables, it is easily repeatable to tell the difference they make. Many would say it wouldn't but it just did in my system. Remember I'm sitting about 7ft from some 5,9" electrostatic speakers with dual subs, I think it's about as close to near-field un-distorted listening as one can get. I'm not saying it's the best system ever or anywhere near but it seems to give more information with every upgrade. If I was sitting a bit further away with 'regular' speakers other things, soundstage/imaging/depth etc might be way better but I doubt I'd be hearing this absolute inner detail. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 21, 2021 10:42:28 GMT
I think your TQ cable was high capacitance? So swapping from that might make a difference depending on everything else. Also you know you swapped cables so are listening attentively for any change - and so noticing the micro details which might have been there before - or not, as the TQ is weird cable. But the same applies to making any change in the system, we listen differently to how we usually do. Near field is usually considered to be about 1 metre from speakers, like if sat at a mixing desk using the bridge monitors - but given the size of the speakers I know what you mean.  |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 10:58:53 GMT
I think your TQ cable was high capacitance? So swapping from that might make a difference depending on everything else. Also you know you swapped cables so are listening attentively for any change - and so noticing the micro details which might have been there before - or not, as the TQ is weird cable. But the same applies to making any change in the system, we listen differently to how we usually do. Near field is usually considered to be about 1 metre from speakers, like if sat at a mixing desk using the bridge monitors - but given the size of the speakers I know what you mean. Yes the difference may be due to the electrical properties of the cable but the TQ annihilated everything else that's been through here. Van Damme (black/blue), Mark Grant 4mm/6mm, various OCC cables, it wasn't even close. I know the listening bias thing but to be honest I don't think it affects my decision critique of components I'm trying out. As much as one can remove it from the equation anyway. I know what a particular instrument on a particular track sounds like, the texture, the impact, where it appears in the soundstage and how far it comes from the speakers and how far behind it goes. If the cable doesn't recreate that image/sound whatever how I know it should be reproduced and indeed how I like it, it's not staying in. I really do remove as much expectation of something improving on what I've already got, as I can. After all IF it is better it's going to cost me money which I, contrary to my recent excursions, actually like holding onto (sometimes . . . ). You could argue it's not volume matched or whatever but I back myself to be able to judge if I like something or if I don't, I really don't need a blind test or whatever to ascertain that. It's a waste of time for me. I'm too far into it now to be wanting or 'willing' a cable or component change to do magical things, if it does it does and if it doesn't it doesn't. I'm perfectly happy with the sound (just like I was with the TQ's) I was blissfully unaware how good the Acoustic Revive stuff was until I tried it, and that's the key here, trying it. I dare say I'll get to the point where I just get bored of looking for improvements, but I'm not there yet. It's a good place I'm in where I really like the sound everything I have makes but that doesn't discourage me from trying to improve it. My old man has been re-building his model railway, he could have finished it many times over and just sat back and enjoyed watching it run, but that's not the point. It's kind of the same for me, I'd like to finish it one day no doubt, but I've got time on my side and I enjoy the challenge. |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 11:03:33 GMT
Near field is usually considered to be about 1 metre from speakers, like if sat at a mixing desk using the bridge monitors - but given the size of the speakers I know what you mean. Yes it is, I used to spend a lot of time sat at a desk with a couple of monitors and a computer but exactly as you have implied the size and proportions are what I was referring to there, making it proportionally 'near-field'. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 21, 2021 11:55:22 GMT
Near field is usually considered to be about 1 metre from speakers, like if sat at a mixing desk using the bridge monitors - but given the size of the speakers I know what you mean. Yes it is, I used to spend a lot of time sat at a desk with a couple of monitors and a computer but exactly as you have implied the size and proportions are what I was referring to there, making it proportionally 'near-field'. Ok so back to those nifty Terminals. How do they fit to the casework? |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 12:04:26 GMT
Yes it is, I used to spend a lot of time sat at a desk with a couple of monitors and a computer but exactly as you have implied the size and proportions are what I was referring to there, making it proportionally 'near-field'. Ok so back to those nifty Terminals. How do they fit to the casework? Indeed, drill a hole the diameter of "hard polymer material" be that in the amplifier or speakers I presume. Best make it 1mm smaller to ensure a very tight fit. I've not quite got my head around the 'relief' provided by the lip as obviously you don't want it moving about in there at all.  As the guy in the video does refer to other binding posts being quite fragile and breaking I would imagine there is some design principal in this one to prevent that. So can you see the potential in the design? IE doing away with a fair amount of 'unnecessary' material? |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 21, 2021 12:13:15 GMT
Ok so back to those nifty Terminals. How do they fit to the casework? Indeed, drill a hole the diameter of "hard polymer material" be that in the amplifier or speakers I presume. Best make it 1mm smaller to ensure a very tight fit. I've not quite got my head around the 'relief' provided by the lip as obviously you don't want it moving about in there at all. As the guy in the video does refer to other binding posts being quite fragile and breaking I would imagine there is some design principal in this one to prevent that. So can you see the potential in the design? IE doing away with a fair amount of 'unnecessary' material? I like the simplicity of it, but I'm still not convinced by the principal of less material being an issue. For instance, when I was doing the fully soldered system experiment, i used some KLE RCA sockets and some KLE RCA plugs ages ago now. The sound was very lean. Noticeable loss of heft in the LF too. They were further away from the soldered system I was trying to recreate. The other major issue I have is that I do not solder speaker connections. Is it possible to fit 4mm² stranded stuff in? |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 12:20:49 GMT
Indeed, drill a hole the diameter of "hard polymer material" be that in the amplifier or speakers I presume. Best make it 1mm smaller to ensure a very tight fit. I've not quite got my head around the 'relief' provided by the lip as obviously you don't want it moving about in there at all. As the guy in the video does refer to other binding posts being quite fragile and breaking I would imagine there is some design principal in this one to prevent that. So can you see the potential in the design? IE doing away with a fair amount of 'unnecessary' material? I like the simplicity of it, but I'm still not convinced by the principal of less material being an issue. For instance, when I was doing the fully soldered system experiment, i used some KLE RCA sockets and some KLE RCA plugs ages ago now. The sound was very lean. Noticeable loss of heft in the LF too. They were further away from the soldered system I was trying to recreate. The other major issue I have is that I do not solder speaker connections. Is it possible to fit 4mm² stranded stuff in? Yeah after reading up I can see the merits of not soldering them, possibly the crimped connection plus the heat-shrink is enough as long as you're not yanking them out. I'm not saying the extra material in the signal path is an 'issue' per se, but it does make sense to have as little as possible in the signal path (to me anyway). It's possible the inferior sound you experienced with the KLE's was due to another factor as it doesn't seem likely that the extra material in another setup that the signal has to pass through 'adds' or prevents the removal of 'heft/weight' of the sound. This connection looks to me, to be as close as possible to an unbroken path. I could be wrong of course but they're not that expensive in the scheme of things. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,399
Member is Online
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 21, 2021 13:07:01 GMT
I like the simplicity of it, but I'm still not convinced by the principal of less material being an issue. For instance, when I was doing the fully soldered system experiment, i used some KLE RCA sockets and some KLE RCA plugs ages ago now. The sound was very lean. Noticeable loss of heft in the LF too. They were further away from the soldered system I was trying to recreate. The other major issue I have is that I do not solder speaker connections. Is it possible to fit 4mm² stranded stuff in? Yeah after reading up I can see the merits of not soldering them, possibly the crimped connection plus the heat-shrink is enough as long as you're not yanking them out. I'm not saying the extra material in the signal path is an 'issue' per se, but it does make sense to have as little as possible in the signal path (to me anyway). It's possible the inferior sound you experienced with the KLE's was due to another factor as it doesn't seem likely that the extra material in another setup that the signal has to pass through 'adds' or prevents the removal of 'heft/weight' of the sound. This connection looks to me, to be as close as possible to an unbroken path. I could be wrong of course but they're not that expensive in the scheme of things. Yeah, you may be right. I'd be up for trying them, as I am most things. |
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Dec 21, 2021 14:06:29 GMT
Thinking about this the .045" distance from wire to wire is marketing BS.
Electricity will take the path of least resistance and that is not going to be the end of a wire just touching a part of a connector. If there was the possibility of soldering the very end of the wire to the connector material that would improve things.
Crimping is used for a reason, it provides a very high pressure area that gives maximum surface to surface contact ensuring minimal resistance.
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Dec 21, 2021 14:16:30 GMT
Thinking about this the .045" distance from wire to wire is marketing BS. Electricity will take the path of least resistance and that is not going to be the end of a wire just touching a part of a connector. If there was the possibility of soldering the very end of the wire to the connector material that would improve things. Crimping is used for a reason, it provides a very high pressure area that gives maximum surface to surface contact ensuring minimal resistance. Yes it looks more like it is perhaps potential improvement through increased contact surface and the removal of a lot of 'unnecessary' mass from the connection assembly. The proximity thing may just have been a technical fact which has been highlighted and assumed to be an improvement but I don't think it detracts from the rest of the design which is certainly interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by brucew268 on Apr 1, 2022 9:47:02 GMT
Chris, did you ever have have a go with these?
I'm still trying to think why low mass would be better on a copper speaker connection? One wants good current handling which I would think would mean higher mass. If brass instead of copper, I could see mass being an issue in signal transmission, but....
|
|
