• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Ok, how bad really are magnetic materials in binding posts?

It is not a counter myth. It is a scientific fact that pure silver films will not readily form silver oxide (Ag2O) under ambient conditions. I studied the surface chemistry and electronic structure of silver films extensively using a variety of surface sensitive spectroscopies. These experiments were all done in an ultra high vacuum system on pure clean silver films with controlled exposure to a variety of gases. The silver films were vacuum deposited and alternately argon-ion etched followed with high temperature annealing until a 100% pure silver surface was obtained. The silver films were then exposed to controlled amounts of O2 gas (pure O2 and O2 + water vapor) at room temperature and analyzed with Photoelectron Spectroscopy. No evidence of Ag2O formation was observed even after hours of exposure. However, low concentrations of physisorbed O2 were observed. For dissociative chemisorption to occur, it required heating the silver film to several hundred degrees C, in which case the formation of Ag2O was observed. In comparison, similarly prepared metal films of Cu, Al, and Ni all formed an oxide layer within seconds of exposure to O2 gas at room temperature. Exposure of the silver films to controlled amounts of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) gas (pure H2S and H2S + water vapor) resulted in a Ag2S layer within minutes of exposure at room temperature. The presence of water vapor increases the reaction rate considerably.

I would like to clarify that silver in it bulk form is not readily reactive with O2 but in its atomic form it is very reactive. For example in silver nanoparticles, a large portion of the silver atoms at the surface of the nanoparticle are not fully coordinated (they have atomic-like properties) and are very reactive. This is the reason that silver nanoparticles are widely used as catalysts. It is possible that a poor silver film with a lot of defects at the surface could have silver atoms that are not fully coordinated and could react with O2 at these defect sites.


The statement regarding Ag2S being a semiconductor is only to dispel the myth that the surface remains conductive after the formation of the Ag2S layer. This is obvious when analyzing the silver surface after exposure to H2S gas and observing the formation of a layer of Ag2S on the silver surface. Analysis of the Ag2S layer with Photoelectron Spectroscopy and Low Energy Inverse Photoemission Spectroscopy, illustrates that the surface electronic properties change from a conductor to a semiconductor and the surface becomes less conductive.
I appreciate your learned (two syllables) reply. I certainly defer to your depth of knowledge in this area.

That said, you seem to equate "slowly" with not at all...at what temperature do you claim oxidation stops entirely?

Similarly, since when are semiconductors non-conductive (even if they are obviously far less conductive than metals)? What is the conductivity threshold at which you declare something to be non-conductive?

Possibly this is just Chemistry vs Physics points-of-view... Aaaand yes, this is a largely pointless sidebar in what seems to me to be a mostly pointless thread.
 
That said, you seem to equate "slowly" with not at all...at what temperature do you claim oxidation stops entirely?
I never stated oxidation of silver as "slowly" with "not at all". I just stated that Ag2O will not form on "pure silver" films under ambient conditions. High temperatures (between 150 to 250 degrees C) or additional chemistry with molecular oxygen (O2) is required for the formation of Ag2O. If one uses atomic oxygen one can produce Ag2O on a silver surface.

Similarly, since when are semiconductors non-conductive (even if they are obviously far less conductive than metals)? What is the conductivity threshold at which you declare something to be non-conductive?
I never said that semiconductors are non-conductive. What I said is when Ag2S forms on the surface of silver, the surface conductivity is reduced.
 
So, does the oxidation of silverware and jewelry at room temperature (or body temperature) under normal pressures not change silver's conductivity?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
So, does the oxidation of silverware and jewelry at room temperature (or body temperature) under normal pressures not change silver's conductivity?

Thanks!
Silver tarnish is indeed a poor conductor compared to pure silver. This pdf has a lot of info about the issues seen with silver plated connectors.

Apparently since silver sulfide is soft, thin films of it will (ideally, at least) be largely pushed aside during contact mating, resulting in direct silver-to-silver contact. In connector mating there is "wiping" though so I'm not sure how/if this effect applies a wire-to-binding-post connection.
 
So, does the oxidation of silverware and jewelry at room temperature (or body temperature) under normal pressures not change silver's conductivity?

Thanks!
The surface conductivity is significantly reduced with tarnished silverware or jewelry, however the bulk conductivity remains unchanged. I would point out that silverware and jewelry are typically sterling silver which is not pure silver but consists of 92.5% silver and 7.5% metal alloy. The metal alloy is typically copper. So the tarnish is primarily silver sulfide but also contains oxides of copper of which there are two CuO and Cu2O.
 
I believe that tightly screwed down connections are considered to be among the best because the metals crush into each other, forming new clean contact areas, which are essentially sealed off, so oxidation doesn't take place. So if your connection is good and tight, oxidation and tarnish are not important considerations - the surfaces that are not in contact will oxidize or tarnish, but those areas aren't part of the circuit.
 
I believe that tightly screwed down connections are considered to be among the best because the metals crush into each other, forming new clean contact areas, which are essentially sealed off, so oxidation doesn't take place. So if your connection is good and tight, oxidation and tarnish are not important considerations - the surfaces that are not in contact will oxidize or tarnish, but those areas aren't part of the circuit.
See post #62.
 
Dissimilar metals are a problem - any time there is an interface, there is the potential for issues. There is no getting around any difference in the wire and the terminal, but adding a third is not helpful. Solder's job is to create mechanical strength and to seal the connection, but if the connection is a good one already, solder is either redundant, or unhelpful. And if you have soldered the wire braid before screwing down the connection, it is interfering with the direct connection of the braid and the terminal.
 
Dissimilar metals are a problem - any time there is an interface, there is the potential for issues. There is no getting around any difference in the wire and the terminal, but adding a third is not helpful. Solder's job is to create mechanical strength and to seal the connection, but if the connection is a good one already, solder is either redundant, or unhelpful. And if you have soldered the wire braid before screwing down the connection, it is interfering with the direct connection of the braid and the terminal.
I believe that it's called Galvanic corrosion. This can make removing original steel bolts from aluminum fittings one of the more exciting events.
 
That is one issue, but I believe more common with boats and with Land Rovers exposed to water and salt.
 
It is also common to garden railroads where the builder has used different types of track. Track is available in ferrous, brass, aluminum, stainless steel, and nickel silver. When the nickel silver oxidizes, the oxide is still a conductor. Brass is the most common but the oxide does not conduct. Ferrous won't last for any time at all, and you can't solder to stainless or aluminum and aluminum it is very soft.

The brass track will actually turn pink at the joiners as the zinc sacrifices itself leaving the copper behind.
 
Wow, 4 pages since I last checked in on this thread. Yikes.

Lots of discussion of conductivity, which I think is not so much what I've gathered the issue with Ferrous materials in the path. I wish I could find the original kernel that sparked my contemplation of this. But what I remember reading was the idea that the Ferrous nuts on the otherwise non-ferrous binding posts would in some small way cause smearing, particularly in the high frequencies, because the magnetic parts could/would store and release energy at different rates than the non-ferrous parts?

Anyway, as the OP that started this thread I want to clarify that I was not super concerned about it. I was just doing my thing of upgrading from spring clips to binding posts on some vintage speakers and once again I found gold-plated steel nuts on otherwise decent quality middle of the road 5-ways. Now, I'm sitting there frustrated that the Brass nuts I bought last time are the wrong threading this time. Do I pause the project and spend $1.50 at the hardware store next trip out of the house? Or is it just not worth it at all?

I'm sure someone would need NASA level test equipment to actually prove or disprove the effect. But at the same time replacing a few nuts is not the worst audiophool thing I've done without proven merit. Hell, I do remember reading in another forum a dude extolling the benefits of replacing all the steel screws holding the drivers into the cabinets with Brass screws. I don't think I'll go that far.
 
...what I remember reading was the idea that the Ferrous nuts on the otherwise non-ferrous binding posts would in some small way cause smearing, particularly in the high frequencies, because the magnetic parts could/would store and release energy at different rates than the non-ferrous parts?
From what I could find, the proven problems with this seem to be at frequencies above the audio range. It should be easy enough to characterize a negative effect at audio if there is one. Someone should run a wire through a hundred (or more?) nuts and show it matters.

That said, with a signal wire effectively running through the middle of the nut, this could easily be the worst case scenario for any effect. The nut in this situation is effectively a bead inductor made from conductive steel---having (presumably) lousy magnetic characteristics and forming a shorted loop besides. At some frequency such a situation indeed becomes bad news.
 
Last edited:
From what I could find, the proven problems with this seem to be at frequencies above the audio range. It should be easy enough to characterize a negative effect at audio if there is one. Someone should run a wire through a hundred (or more?) nuts and show it matters.

That said, with a signal wire effectively running through the middle of the nut, this could easily be the worst case scenario for any effect. The nut in this situation is effectively a bead inductor made from conductive steel---having (presumably) lousy magnetic characteristics and forming a shorted loop besides. At some frequency such a situation indeed becomes bad news.

I feel like this is the answer to a lot of similar questions. I.e., out of audio range and only if extreme levels of implementation. I say this with an internal chuckle.

I also think I am going to take the position of 'if it's convenient and inexpensive go ahead, if not don't worry about it'. Same as I felt about speaker cable elevators. Not on my radar until I found a collection of ceramic telephone pole insulators at a yards sale for $10, and now I elevate my cables. Ha!
 
Back
Top Bottom