WBT binding posts : nextgen vs topline

Both actually work no better than the buck-50's from Radio shack. You are buying for bling and bragging rights. Pick the one that strokes your ego the most.

Gee, if they had not tired to make oxygen free copper, they could have gotten 6 9's out of it. Oxygen is used in copper to remove impurities. Totally irrelevant, but that is how it is made.

Let the flames begin.....:D
 
Yea, and that .000001 Ohm difference in the copper makes a big difference when they are nickle and gold plated, soldered with tin-lead-silver (and not in an inert environment) Of course, just touching a binding post is probably enough to cause the resistance to rise more than that last "9" of purity. I know, we need heat sinks and fans for our binding posts just like CPU's! :D

The problem here we are trying to help folks with is that there is a big difference between empirical physics and engineering. Let's let NIST worry about international standards and if the gram has actually evaporated enough to measure. I'll stick with my nickel over brass terminal blocks so I can afford better tweeters. We have a tremendous way to go before speakers catch up with he rest of the chain, so let's work on the parts that matter. I could provide a list if anyone were ambitious or looking for a thesis project.
 

tinitus

diyAudio Moderator R.I.P.
2005-11-24 1:47 am
I think WBT is from before the internet was invented
might explain the prices
at the time it was probably very expencive to construct this kind of special stuff, and market it

time have changed a lot since then
but some older companies have a hard time keeping up with the new and cheaper internet market
they are founded on a different 'strategy'
 

oldies

Banned
2011-12-03 4:27 pm
No flaming from me since I agree.

$320 for binding posts is about $310 more than I'm prepared to spend.

As for oxygen free copper: It does conduct better than standard copper. If the conductivity of standard copper is taken as 100% oxygen free copper can reach a staggering 101%!!!


there is no substance or compound with 100% of conductivity!! (absolute 100?!... mmh nothing is absolute)
 

diypass

Member
2012-04-01 9:35 am
I haven't done listening test's of the binding posts, but I have for interconnect connections.

The WBT NextGen RCA connectors (Silver), with the Eichmann Bullet's, where better than all other's tested. There was a clarity in sound most other's couldn't match.

I don't know if this answer applies to your application.

better which, instead what ?
please explain better, i don't understand
 
there is no substance or compound with 100% of conductivity!! (absolute 100?!... mmh nothing is absolute)

I didn't say anywhere that coppers conductivity is 100%.

What I said was that if we take standard coppers conductivity [as a benchmark and] call it 100% oxygen free copper can ideally reach 101%.
Silver then would be probably around 105% or so and gold in between the two.

If you use the actual conductivity values copper reaches 58 siemens and oxygen-free copper can reach 58.68 siemens.
 
Has anyone here conducted blind tests between copper and brass posts or is the usual Luddite pile on?

Nope, we are engineers. Be my guest. I am sure the manufactures will help you get published with several glossy adds on the facing pages. Pays their rent you know. I would like to see the system you intend to use for a reference. Let me know what the amp topology is, what it's output filter looks like, and what type of dominant pole compensation it uses. Try as you might, audio will just plain not violate the laws of physics.
 
Electrical resistivity and conductivity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These are the numbers for empirically pure metals. Metals alloy, as in everything outside the laboratory, is not as good.

As you can see, gold is no where near as good a conductor as copper or silver. When C.D. says 105%, he is speaking in relation to copper, the reference of copper being "1".