Grounding boxes - The real deal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edward

I fear this thread is going to cost me a lot of money if what Alan says is true. :)

---

I don't think for a second he is making it up, on the other hand with products like this a lot of diligence is required. Someone elses' sighted listening experience , regardless of who it is, really isn't enough to hang a hat on as far as I'm concerned. Interesting that the effect was magnified by attaching more cables, this does fit in with the theory postulated regarding the Entreq box, and the measurements, that show an increase in noise the more length of cable is attached.


I've seen it theorised that the increased soundstage of a recording on vinyl over its digital counterpart is due to the relatively poor SNR of vinyl. We can't assume that technically better automatically means sounds better since psycho-acoustics does not always work that way. So in theory increasing noise may have the subjective effect of increasing soundstage and that could be what is occurring here.

I wonder if the same effect could be had by simply attaching long, unscreened cables to all unused inputs? They would not need to be attached to anything at the other end to act as aerials.

Agreed Martin. For all the reasons already mentioned I'm highly sceptical of this tech, the issue here now is that Alan is someone I value to be super objective and indeed sceptical but seems to be convinced. But I ain't gonna drop £800 (the cheapest option that Tony has) just yet. Would much prefer to have a demo unit first before forking out (or not) hard earned cash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

I'm struggling with a couple of things here.

presumably the system sounded acceptable before any connections were made?

Then 1 connection is made and the improvement is so great that blind testing it would be nonsense.

Then a second connection is made and again the improvement is not subtle

Then a third....

I mean there is a limit to how much sound quality can be improved (in theory up to the limits of the quality of the recording). To have three 'not subtle' jumps up in quality seems unlikely - unless the starting system was badly flawed. Was it badly flawed?

---

If I was in your position I would be asking the very same questions. There were no flaws. Let me try to put some description to it, though very simplified to show differences in scale.
The system sounded very good to start with, as you might expect with the equipment used. Lets say the image was between and behind the speakers.

Step 1 gave a 50% increase in image width and depth.
Step 2 gave another 50% increase in image width and depth. Plus I was thinking 'where has all that bass come from?' It was there in the first place but now sounds that much more tangible. I was told this is a common reaction.
Step 3 and you are suddenly in the Albert Hall. It's not that the players have suddenly moved it is just that the ambience is there.

This is simplified, the snap, the attack and decay, the sheer fluidity of the performance just jumps out at you.
Once heard it is difficult to believe that it all comes from Red Book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edward

Agreed Martin. For all the reasons already mentioned I'm highly skeptical of this tech, the issue here now is that Alan is someone I value to be super objective and indeed skeptical but seems to be convinced. But I ain't gonna drop £800 (the cheapest option that Tony has) just yet. Would much prefer to have a demo unit first before forking out (or not) hard earned cash.

---

Likewise I would be happy to trial it as intrigues me. But the cheapest one is £800. I have to pay for my new Tannoys yet which is consuming most of this year's hi-fi budget. So even if I did decide that it does what it claims I wouldn't be forking out for it this year. So wouldn't want to tie up demo stock, doesn't seem fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

That measurement was of the Entreq grounding box, Alan is talking about the RTZ grounding box, they are different products so not necessarily identical in construction or operation.

---

The 'measurement' involved with Entreq box is a complete red herring. The only things involved were an analyser, a cable and the box. Having no audio system involved cannot be correlated to any effect on an audio system.

To my mind all that test showed was that the Entreq box was something that would absorb wideband noise. Substitute 'pick-up' for absorb if you wish.
That noise was coming from somewhere, perhaps the analyser?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

I wonder if the same effect could be had by simply attaching long, unscreened cables to all unused inputs? They would not need to be attached to anything at the other end to act as aerials.

---

I believe you need the box to act as the waste bin for the pollutants. How does it work? I don't know, I wish I did.

Edward, I am convinced because I heard it. As I said in the OP use your own ears.
I agree the problem is the cost, you would need to hear what it does in your system before even contemplating purchase.

Recently I (and Adam of this parish) have been playing around with in-room response measurements. It would be interesting to see what differences (if any) such a grounding box would make - perhaps only measuring the speaker output and not the full in-room response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firebottle

I believe you need the box to act as the waste bin for the pollutants. How does it work? I don't know, I wish I did.

Edward, I am convinced because I heard it. As I said in the OP use your own ears.
I agree the problem is the cost, you would need to hear what it does in your system before even contemplating purchase.

---

Just to clarify Alan, I do believe you. It is because of this I'm paying close attention now. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edward

Recently I (and Adam of this parish) have been playing around with in-room response measurements. It would be interesting to see what differences (if any) such a grounding box would make - perhaps only measuring the speaker output and not the full in-room response.

---

Not so easy to measure soundstage. But it would be interesting to see if the FR changed, the problem is that if it doesn't, it still doesn't prove anything one way or the other.


For me I like to know how things work before I buy them. That way I know I couldn't get the same thing any cheaper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firebottle

The 'measurement' involved with Entreq box is a complete red herring. The only things involved were an analyser, a cable and the box. Having no audio system involved cannot be correlated to any effect on an audio system.

To my mind all that test showed was that the Entreq box was something that would absorb wideband noise. Substitute 'pick-up' for absorb if you wish.
That noise was coming from somewhere, perhaps the analyser?

---

To be fair the analyser base noise floor was tested so the above is unlikely but I agree the results would have had more weight if an audio system where involved.