+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 71 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 706

Thread: Grounding boxes - The real deal

  1. #11
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 26,190
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    The ASA is a self regulatory organisation i.e it is run by the advertisers in the same way as the Press Complaints Commission is run by the newspapers. It has no statutory powers.
    Current Lash Up:

    *Sony SCD XB790QS* Nelson Pass DCB1 / Krell KSA100 mkII * JM Lab Electra 926 *


    'You fool! To think that your ape-brain could contain the full knowledge of the Krell!'

  2. #12
    Join Date: Oct 2012

    Location: The Black Country

    Posts: 5,066
    I'm Alan.

    Default

    To answer Martin first, the kit was as follows:

    Nova x50d streamer, Tad d1000 dac, Coherent Systems Pre-amp, Coherent Systems digital (switching) power amp.

    Most of the music listened to was Red Book (44.1/16 bit) quality on the Nova.

    When assessing the grounding box influence the volume setting was untouched. The demonstrated improvements were done in 3 steps. The ONLY thing that was altered was the number of cables from the grounding box connected to the pre-amp and dac. No connections were made to the streamer or power amp.

    Step 1. Connect one cable to the pre-amp, an unused input, left channel - totally irrelevant.
    Step 2. Connect one more cable to the pre-amp, an unused input, right channel.
    Step 3. Connect the other 8 cables to other inputs/tape loop (unused) and a spare SPDIF input on the dac. I don't know the exact connections for all 8.

    On each step the improvement was NOT subtle. If I had been blindfolded that wouldn't have made a scrap of difference, in fact I could have been standing outside the room in the hallway and still noticed the difference.

    Now to Simon.
    There is no 'unknown' science here, it is just reducing the electrical pollutants that mask the soundstage that is already there in the music.
    No changes were made to the file, delivery method or volume level.

    The difficulty that anyone has, myself included, is how can this work when all one is doing is adding a passive device into a system. The problem also is that you don't hear the 'pollutants', you just hear the depth in the music that was already there once the masking effect is removed.

    The ASA would have nothing to investigate, the actual levels of 'pollutants' are completely irrelevant. The perceived difference is all you need to hear.
    The 'HF noise' is nothing to do with audible noise, it is all the internal and external radio frequency pollutants that cover an extremely wide bandwidth.

  3. #13
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 26,190
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    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?
    Current Lash Up:

    *Sony SCD XB790QS* Nelson Pass DCB1 / Krell KSA100 mkII * JM Lab Electra 926 *


    'You fool! To think that your ape-brain could contain the full knowledge of the Krell!'

  4. #14
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: Forest of Dean, Glos

    Posts: 11,347
    I'm Jerry.

    Default

    There is always room for improvement.
    Jerry

    i. Internet streaming > Audiobyte Black Dragon DAC > Marantz HD-AMP1 > MBL 116F speakers
    Cables : Wyreworld Starlight USB, Epiphany Atratus III interconnect, Tellurium Q Silver speaker.
    USB signal pampering : Wired4Sound Recovery & Halide Bridge.

    ii Internet streaming > Audiolab MDAC > Marantz HD-AMP1 > Infinity Cascade 9 speakers & Jamo SUB200

  5. #15
    Join Date: Mar 2017

    Location: Seaford UK

    Posts: 977
    I'm Dennis.

    Default

    I'm also struggling Macca, a while ago a technical measurement showed a large increase in noise, and these previous posts are saying that the noise is reduced.

  6. #16
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 26,190
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pharos View Post
    I'm also struggling Macca, a while ago a technical measurement showed a large increase in noise, and these previous posts are saying that the noise is reduced.
    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.
    Current Lash Up:

    *Sony SCD XB790QS* Nelson Pass DCB1 / Krell KSA100 mkII * JM Lab Electra 926 *


    'You fool! To think that your ape-brain could contain the full knowledge of the Krell!'

  7. #17
    Join Date: Apr 2012

    Location: Southall, West London

    Posts: 41,100
    I'm Geoff.

    Default

    I managed to remove all noise from my system. I turned it off!
    "when common sense, logic and plausibility are excluded. All that remain are foolishness and lies"

  8. #18
    Join Date: Mar 2010

    Location: Sheffield

    Posts: 2,921
    I'm Simon.

    Default

    Alan

    Could your wife hear it in the back of the van as well?

  9. #19
    Join Date: Mar 2017

    Location: London N2

    Posts: 1,588
    I'm Edward.

    Default

    I fear this thread is going to cost me a lot of money if what Alan says is true.
    Main: Tidal/Roon > MiniITX > Metrum Hex > LDR > either Radford STA25 V or Trilogy 968 > Tannoy (Eaton or Berkeley).
    2nd: Tidal/Roon > Roopio on Pi > Chevron Paradox > Firebottle Buffer > Sugden Masterclass IA-4 > Kudos Cardea


  10. #20
    Join Date: Mar 2010

    Location: Sheffield

    Posts: 2,921
    I'm Simon.

    Default

    Tony makes a claim for 'unspecified reduction' in noise in his web copy. He'll have to back that up with numbers and methodology or withdraw it if the ASA chose to investigate. That's how these things work.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 71 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast



 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •