What's so bad about spring clips? (1 Viewer)

[Justin Ward]

It seems like spring clips are always referred to in a negative manner. Why is this? I do notice that cheaper speakers tend to use them while better speakers tend to use binding posts, but what difference does it really make?

 

[Greg Haynes]

Spring clips are bad in that they don't retain the same tight connection that a binding post can hold. I have read that spring clips lose between 10-20% of the speaker signal. I don't know if this true of not, but just something I have read. Spring clips will always be found on low cost brands.

 

[KeithH]

I don't like spring clips since they don't accept banana plugs or spade connectors, which I prefer to bare wire. The problems I have with bare wire is that it oxidizes over time, which can lead to signal loss, and it is more susceptible to shorting than are banana plugs or spades.

The other issue with spring clips is simply the fact that they are associated with budget receivers. Truthfully, when I see a receiver with spring clips, I think "cheap". Going with spring clips over binding posts is one corner that manufacturers cut in producing lower-cost receivers.

 

[Jason Wilcox]

my old koss speakers have spring clips and i just use pins with my 12g wire to avoid oxidization. my old marantz 2235B receiver also features spring clip-like connectors.

 

[Phuong]

The bad part about spring clips is that it signals a cost cutting measure. It can lead you to wonder if the manufacturer cut costs in other, less-visible areas.

At the same time, the use of binding posts sends us the message that performance is prioritized. With this in mind, many savvy manufacturers could take advantage of this perception and simply add binding posts to their cheapy receivers to give them the illusion of more high-end gear.