I recently purchased pc for cd player with rhodium ends on both...I wasnt feeling the mojo from it and was not content with lowend resolution/grunt.I switched ac/male end with nice furutech copper and it has made the difference...Im surprised at the difference that it has made.Bass has more info/definition/warmth and high end still has sparkle with the neutral transparency that rhodium (iec) seems to offer.I know this has been talked about alot and probably deserves a duh!.. Rhodium indeed has its place in my system after all this time.Like it.


I've found rhodium, like nickel, too hard to grip well in either AC or speaker connectors. I avoid them at all costs, preferring copper in the former and silver bananas in the latter.

Yet to try cu mitch2...this is gold plated (edit) copper...fi-11 plus gripping pretty well,no issues with it not gripping well enough.Kind of burnt on the whole merry go round...think ill just sit and try and leave it all alone for 2 weeks.


i have a few of the gold plated here and can live with those.  I never understood what Cardas or Furutech liked about rhodium.  I would rather have old-fashioned tin.

You guys are tough audience...im surprised im liking it as much.Yeah i kind of thought the same to mitch2/erik/carls.Gold/copper has always been go too for my tastes, as for Furutechs highend...28 might be last stop.

Ok. I’ll expand a bit so hopefully you think I’m factual rather than tough. Copper conductivity is 256% of rhodium conductivity. It obviously isn’t an insulator and it obviously works. But why would you wrap your precious highly conductive copper conductors in a metal that is that much less conductive?

Because it has a cool sounding name, it is in the platinum group which sounds exotic and expensive, and it responds well to marketying hype.


PS for comparison, silver is 7% better conductor than copper.

Rhodium isn’t typically selected for its conductance characteristics, but for its durability. Generally, via plating, it is very thin, very even, and very hard. Th hardness/smoothness allows for a consistent delivery of current on contacts similar to cryogenically treating cabling, and Rhodium will not oxidize or result in wear over time as much as gold or silver plating or straight out copper.

Yes, Rhodium has a tendency to sound brighter/sharper at first, but IME it just takes a really long time to break in. Once it does, that harshness tends to go away. Not to say it is better than other conductors this is subjective, but it does have its strengths and weaknesses, and I personally prefer them if the whole cable has synergy mostly due to the durability and lack of oxidation.

Also, the sound will depend on the quality of the connector and conductors it is paired with. Rhodium plated phosphor bronze or copper alloy wont sound as robust and clear as Rhodium plating over solid silver plating over solid copper conductors, for instance. 

Also, the sound will depend on the quality of the connector and conductors it is paired with. Rhodium plated phosphor bronze or copper alloy wont sound as robust and clear as Rhodium plating over solid silver plating over solid copper conductors, for instance.

+1 The base metal is very important.

+2 @blisshifi 

Very well stated and informative comments as to why rhodium is chosen as the preferred plating material by many High- End audio manufacturers. Now if an individual likes the sound or not is a subjective matter as is literally everything with regard to audio.


I agree, Rhodium can sound good but does take a really long time for break-in and the consistent good sound. In my opinion, that's why when you read the forum here on Audiogon about the Furutech GTX-D Rhodium (R) Duplex Receptacle, members report very long time periods of inconsistent sound and 250 - 300 hours or more of break-in time.

Cable being used is simple furutech absolute power plus...14 gauge occ copper used for my cd player.The cable itself is well made but as stated it came with both ends rhodium.It just didnt have that full warmth in lowend...it does now.Cable was bought used and i assume he ran until breakin was achieved.I was set to write this cable off that 14 awg isnt enough to give up the goodies/cd player...its ok to be wrong,right?

I posted because i achieved what i was hoping through mixing ac ends fwiw.

I concur with above statements about rhodium. I use it on virtually every PC with exception of silver on a couple pc. I used mostly gold plated copper or straight copper for many years, one by one I switched to rhodium as it brought more openness and transparency to system. As usual these things all about synergy, I have both copper and silver IC and copper speaker cable, connectors also vary, silver, gold plated copper and rhodium all used.

surfaces meeting between receptable and PC are unlikely to be either even or tight. Most likely different metals will be forming the contact. In my experience a good contact enhancer such as Mad Scientist is well neigh indispensable


You mentioned power cables (PC). A few months ago I purchased 4 PCs from a Latvia brand called Lavricables. Pure unshielded  silver conductor with rhodium plated connectors. They are sounding splendid in my system. The rhodium is causing no sonic issues whatsoever.


Just looked at these charles1dad...They look fast and racy.What group was your purchase from.

For me rhodium does not push things like pure copper or does not mellow things like gold and has speed like silver. It is more durable but takes long time to break in.

+1 The base material is very important.


What group was your purchase from.

I bought 3 Grand power cables (Preamplifier and mono block amplifiers) and 1 Master power cable for CD transport LPS.


Wow...sweet charles.Every days a new day or new system.What a treat for the ears.Yeah petg60,well said...the more i read/listen i think ive made right choice...both are copper base connectors/furutechs

From experience, not a fan of rhodium plating. I'll take copper with gold plating or bare. Plus rhodium is expensive.

Rhodium plated Furutech plugs take a really long time to break in. It took FI-50 NCF plugs close to 400-500hrs to settle in my system. They sound fantastic just be patient. Clarity, air, texture. I don’t hear any harshness

FI-28 R took less time to break in, around 200-250hrs and are a bit warmer sounding than the 50 NCF. 

Furutech power cords are also great. 

Rhodium Is super hard and seemed to scratch up the receiving plugs. Not a fan!

Fwiw i did put the fi-15 plus/iec gold back in.The rhodium does sound nice and clean,but gold doesnt sound so bad either.

Rhodium is nothing more than a gimmick as it’s a poor conductor compared to more traditional options. If you want the same effect, save some money and connect your system using oxidized copper. 

I have assembled a lot of PC’s myself, and have used modest cables from name brands like Shunyata, Audioquest and Isotek, and I have used some boutique built silver plated PCs purchased on Audiogon.  For bulk cable I generally use Furutech and am currently quite fond of FP-TCS31, 12 guage wire, even for digital front ends, but bulk cable from Nanotec is also excellent.  

For connectors, I generally lean towards Rhodium.  I concur with break in time for this metal being interminable, but I prefer the balanced, clean overall sound.  I do like gold plated copper connectors for amps, and silver plated conductors can provide a unicorn brilliance in certain applications.  Furutech connectors are well made, but there are a number of Chinese branded and made knockoff connectors that work very well - some trial and error required.  Audiomeca brand PCs are a super bargain.




I just switched out to rhodium/iec again...I am in a small room and the rhodium is just more controlled.The gold fi -11 ac gives it enough warmth/lowend for atc 19v2.

Plating copper connectors with a thin layer of rhodium does not alter the conductivity of the copper.  Or of the cables to which the connectors are attached.  But not quite a complete waste of money because the rhodium will reduce oxidation in the copper which reduces conductivity and impoverishes the contact between connector and socket, saving the need to clean the connectors with solvent periodically.

@audphile1 @knownothing  @digsmithd       go and do a blind test and then come back


Clearthinker...thanks for input.I am a regular cleaner of my connectors,not so much worried about oxidization.The difference between the 2 iec’s is quite negligible.My room i can hear very well the trade offs of the plating.They both offer something that the other does not...rhodium with its even/slightly controlled balance is really quite nice on alot of my music...but i have concluded at the end of the weekend the gold with its slightly more open sound stage/ect was the one to leave in...🎼

@clearthinker you may not hear a difference between pure copper and rhodium plated copper.  I have built a lot of cables and I do.  As I said above, YMMV.


@knownothing    listening tests are invalid unless they are blind.

I hope YMMV doesn't stand for 'you make me vomit'?

.... go and do a blind test and then come back ...

Instead of orders others around, why don’t you start by telling us the results of your own blind tests? How were they conducted? How many subjects, how many trials? What was revealed?

Or, is blind testing something you require only of others?

Anybody sensible requires blind testing by people who allege they can hear differences that are not expected to exist according to known science.

That is the basis for all science accepted by all authorities.  Claims that do not respect scientific method have no validity.  Imagine hospitals issued you with drugs that had been 'tested' by asking people what they think they felt on a Tuesday evening at 9.15pm.

Anybody sensible requires blind testing by people who allege they can hear differences that are not expected to exist according to known science.

That is the logical fallacy known as circular reasoning, or begging the question; it means the premise of the argument is used as the "proof." You can't on the one hand argue in favor of science, and then ignore it by engaging in ill logic.

Claims that do not respect scientific method have no validity.

Sez you. This is a hobbyist's group, not a scientific forum. If you seek iron-clad scientific data for all claims here, you are likely in the wrong place. If you seek change, you might begin by sharing the results of your own tests - the sorts of tests you demand from others.

Post removed 

@cleeds +1.


I'm interested in your method of arranging blind study listening for your purchasing decisions. How much time do you require to get it done. For your current audio system how long did it take to assemble and match your components/speakers/cables? How effective has this exercise been for you?




This is one example of someone taking time to evaluate similar cables with different connector plating.  It squares with my experiences.  kn




Thanks for your interest in this important topic.

I do not conduct blind tests.  When I am considering an upgrade I listen to the changed component in my system for a long period, say around a month.  If I like it enough, I buy it.  Obviously I am hearing differences, but I am not vainglorious enough to claim that I am hearing an improvement.  I am conservative about upgrades and keep components for a long time.  Even if I decide to change something, I usually keep it for use in my second system, as obviously I liked it when I bought it and that opinion has not changed.

Blind tests would be a great improvement; I think many would agree.  But the idea is often criticised as being too difficult to arrange.  I have given this a lot of thought.

1.   Dealers are trying to sell goods and they hold much more equipment than hobbyists.  Many of them have large listening rooms.  They are in the best position to organise blind tests.  It is to be hoped they don't feel blind tests will reduce their business, but if they hold my beliefs, they may do.

2.   The dealer assembles two identical complete systems in the same space, save for the speakers (unless the component to be evaluated is a speaker).  One system contains the component to be evaluated, the other has a different component, possibly the customer's present piece.  A high grade switch box is constructed to quickly change the connection to the single pair of speakers.  REASON 1  Both programmes must emanate from the same positional source.   REASON 2: This avoids the delay and hassle of swapping components in and out which requires the subject to employ longer aural memory.  Even a minute or two is detrimental - it is commonly believed that aural memory is poor.  Pace those professional reviewers who compare a component today with one they last heard two years ago and claim their opinion is useful.  Does ANYONE believe them?

3.   The customer is blindfolded.  REASON: he cannot see what is going on nor infer cues from the activity of the dealer.  This avoids the oft-cited difficult problem of the operator needing to be 'blind', the 'double-blind' test,  i.e. he does not know which component is playing.

4.   The dealer plays the same material on system A, then system on B, then on one of the systems at random, X.  The customer has to identify X and say if he prefers its sound.  The cycle is repeated at least 10 times.

5.   The results can be analysed statistically.  if the customer is wrong half the time then it is probable he cannot discern a difference.  If he succeeds nearly every time it is probable he can tell the difference and his opinion of which he prefers is validated.




It was his articles and posts (along with dave/zenwave) that were really informative to me.He (dave/zenwave) has it seems to really have a good grasp on materials and "understands’ implications to his builds.Good read on his insight.

Good post knownothing!