Proper Grounding a system

[Daudio]

13 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

Which post has possible explanations?

 

Bottom of my reply to 'marce', 3rd post by me back from this one.

 

15 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

I answered that about an hour ago.

 

Could you give directions to that post, sans post number ?

 

13 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

just noticed that posts don't have a post number.

 

Yeah, sucks, don't it ! One of the many things that went MIA after CA 4.0 

 

 

[pkane2001]

1 hour ago, Daudio said:

Do we need a formal Brainstorming session here ? Or do we have enough smart, educated folks to set aside the critical side of their brain for a moment, and look for serious alternate theory's ?

 

Alternative theory implies that the current theory is incorrect. That is, that some or all of the existing, proven theories of electricity, magnetism, electric fields, electro-magnetic radiation, etc. are wrong and need to be updated with an 'alternative theory'. This is not a question of opinion or belief, this requires a real scientific proof from those that claim this. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I've not seen any evidence yet, especially from those selling these devices. 

[Daudio]

27 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Alternative theory implies that the current theory is incorrect

 

Duh, yeah ! But not that current electrical theory is wrong, no, no, no.

 

What is at issue here is the assumption that these devices are some kind of connection-less ground, that is somehow very attractive to 'bad' electrons. There really is no theory proposed for these things, that I've found yet. (more on that later...)

 

But, I consider the volume of user reports evidence that 'something' is probably going on, and I wish to learn more about it, and perhaps we can come to explain that phenomena properly, using current electrical theory.

 

If you totally disbelieve all those reports, then why would you want to waste your time in this thread. (hint: "Somebody on the Internet is Wrong" is not an acceptable answer  )

 

[Ralf11]

I'm glad we have moved from Alternative facts to Alternative theory.  I am curious to hear what exactly it is however.

 

Also, I have about had it with bad electrons, so I built a wall around my system to keep the bad hombre electrons out.

[Ralf11]

Somehow, I have an inkling that additional derivations from Maxwell's Field Theory are not going to be needed for system grounding -- but hey call me gullible...

[marce]

2 hours ago, Daudio said:

 

 

 

If you have the imagination, and maybe a broader technical knowledge then your specific, narrow, field implies, you could help advance our knowledge here.

 

 

 

You want to help, or hurt ?

 

Wow, two insults... LOL

I have a very good imagination thank you. As to my narrow technical abilities, 35+ years working on PCB layout and system wiring, solving EMC problems, signal integrity problems etc. probably qualifies me to know what I am talking about. I do high speed as well using SIV (signal integrity verify) software and Power Integrity software when required. I understand how signals propagate and put up an excellent PDF by John Wu that illustrates simply and succinctly the basics, hoping that some would look at it... As well as the other links, most importantly the GROUND MYTH links. So I have tried to advance your knowledge. The problem is the facts and physics do not support any explanation as to how these boxes can work as described.

One other thing on the Entreq website I believe they state high frequency noise follows the path of least resistance, this is incorrect, the John Wu  PDF does explain this in detail with some nice pictures.

The first and biggest problem, mentioned before by others is that for current to flow a loop is required, a single wire does not form a loop (except as a dipole, ref my first post "dipoles for dummies" Henry Ott). The second problem is that earth is not a sink for noise, other previously mentioned links. So I hypothesised that if there is some change in the sound it is more likely to noise being picked up, rather than noise shunted anywhere. Another problem is how is the noise differentiated from signal? Once noise gets into the signal it can not be differentiated from the signal apart from some sort of frequency filtering, if the noise is at the same frequencies as the signal in cannot be removed without effecting the signal, so the first rule of EMC is STOP the noise getting in (and out). Adding a single wire to the system 0V reference will not magically shunt noise away, I can find no references to support this, in fact they all consider it bad EMC practice.

A couple more irrelevant links...

Paragraph 13 is interesting in this link:

http://www.electronicdesign.com/boards/whats-all-ground-noise-stuff-anyhow

 

This second link is just an interesting read into the problems of measuring ground noise... and if you use your imagination you can see some relevance to this discussion.

 

http://www.analog.com/media/en/analog-dialogue/raqs/groundNoiseMeasurement.pdf

 

And finally electrons move very slowly when in the presence of signal EM waves, lazy little buggers only meander at about 25um/s,so in the presence of an AC signal they just jiggle, to the music.

[pkane2001]

18 minutes ago, Daudio said:

Duh, yeah ! But not that current electrical theory is wrong, no, no, no.

 

Unfortunately, I've not seen any explanation that would not violate known laws of physics.

• An open circuit will not conduct electricity, i.e., no electric charge will move over an open wire
• An excessive electric charge will not build up on the ground plane of an audio device, since ground plane is a part of a closed circuit
• A box of rocks with just one wire can't capture or store 'excess negative charge from the ground plane'
• Even if it did, somehow, it would itself become electrically charged and would shock you when touched, or at the very least would stop attracting additional charge. Perhaps you need to drain the box every few milliseconds? Is that in the instructions?

35 minutes ago, Daudio said:

If you totally disbelieve all those reports, then why would you want to waste your time in this thread. (hint: "Somebody on the Internet is Wrong" is not an acceptable answer  )

 

I've been curious to learn something new, but it looks like there's nothing new to learn. No real explanation being provided. I think you're right, I'm getting to my fill with this discussion.

[Daudio]

6 minutes ago, marce said:

Wow, two insults... LOL

 

Gee, why so sensitive ! Can't you discuss this stuff without letting your emotions take over ?

The 1st was a challenge, the 2nd is all too true for too many. In fact your (impressive) experience and posting may just work against you by interfering with 'out-of-the-box' ideas. You know that happens.

 

11 minutes ago, marce said:

mentioned before by others is that for current to flow a loop is required, a single wire does not form a loop (circuit)

 

You are not doing your case much good by ignoring the fact that I have been saying the same thing since my 1st post in this thread !!

 

14 minutes ago, marce said:

the facts and physics do not support any explanation as to how these boxes can work as described.

 

Again, I have been saying the same thing !!  Why are you arguing ?

 

 

[Ralf11]

• A box of rocks with just one wire can capture and store excess dollars from the pockets of the gullible audiophile.

[Daudio]

Thanks to Corman for posting the link to the Entreq History document.

 

http://www.entreqasia.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Entreq-History.pdf

 

I read it carefully to see what I could find, related to any theoretical underpinnings of their ‘Ground Boxes’. The following snippets are all I found that directly addressed that goal. There is more there that could be useful in searching for the real phenomena at work with these things. So, here are what I think are the most relevant snippets - Editing and bolding is mine:

“Our understanding today about why these various metals affect the sound & the magnetic fields, so dramatically in tandem, are still in-conclusive.”

“the Konstantin Cables… design does not use traditional shields but rather a drain wire system “EEDS“ to conduct away unwanted voltages and currents from the dielectric and conductor insulation. Instead of connecting the drain wire to the negative pole on the device, we led it away at the end of the cable to its own dedicated terminal. The intention was to then connect this to a protective earth so that noise could be led to the ground… through a wall outlet or to a radiator / water pipe. However we noticed rather quickly that at times connecting to the earth could actually result in poorer sound quality... Our challenge was to produce our own reference ground system that was independent of external contamination, while being extremely stable…”

“I started searching for the man from the University…I explained… our Ground box solution… unable to fully and comprehensively explain the theoretic results, could he help us?... His answer… “ yes… but it will be a very expensive process… why should you waste your money doing it anyway?… you will always be challenged and questioned"… Since that time, we have continually improved and developed both our ranges of ground boxes… rather than worrying about proving its theoretical value with numbers and empirical data.”

And thus…
“Currently we cannot back-up or substantiate the sonic results with empirical data or a host of clearly defined measurements, however, we hope to in the future.“

 

That’s all folks… They gave up on theory for valid business reasons, but there is no good reason this smart (but contentious) community should just give up too 

So, there is No Theoretical Basis for these devices in the company literature. That fact has nothing to do with what actual effects are at work here.

 

If I missed another serious source, please let me know.

 

Now, can interested CA members speculate, dig a little, investigate, experiment, and maybe make a little progress towards filling the gap ? I hope so.

 

 

P.S. if you wish to respond to this post, please only quote a relevant line or two, Not the entire post, so that all of us will have to scroll over it all over again, to discover your golden contribution    TIA

 

 

 

[jabbr]

8 hours ago, YashN said:

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/24275-ac-filtering-grounding-boxes-linear-psu-and-balanced-power/

 

Great thread that involves multiple overlapping issues (rather than only discussing a single box).

 

Come to think of it ... bump

[Ralf11]

"“Our understanding today about why these various metals affect the sound & the magnetic fields, so dramatically in tandem, are still in-conclusive.”"

 

the above assumes there is a real difference in the sound -- I'd like to see their blind testing methodology & results

[YashN]

9 hours ago, Cornan said:

 

Yeah, that was a great thread @YashN!

Well worth reading from start to finish! ? Nice to see you around btw. I almost started a thread "Where did YashN go?" ?

 

Thanks. Just busy with many new projects. Audiophile stuff was actually an exploration which developed from my needing to improve my room acoustics and mixing and mastering, so now I am tackling some of the backlog of projects in that area (lots to do).

 

I still have many projects in audiophile land to do though!  

[YashN]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

Great thread that involves multiple overlapping issues (rather than only discussing a single box).

 

Yes, I initially was quite surprised with the Entreq ('signal grounding') boxes and the Tripoint (external grounding) boxes, but it turns out all these issues are somewhat related: AC Filtering (some Leakage Current), Interconnects (some Leakage here as well, together with additional noise), and various levels of 'grounding' maturity.

[YashN]

10 hours ago, Speedskater said:

Uncontrolled variables.

Good imagination.

Self-fulling expectations.

Lack of controlled testing.

 

Technical explanation

In most cases they don't do anything, but in a few cases the wires to the box acts as a noise/interference antenna.

 

I did mention the possibility of an Entreq working as an antenna. In that case, it would be rather comical as one could expect the overall explanation to be linked to some Euphonic effects.

 

Did you actually do a test though instead of making lists about why it shouldn't work?

 

Because I did in my system with a rudimentary DIY solution.

[pkane2001]

10 minutes ago, YashN said:

I did mention the possibility of an Entreq working as an antenna. In that case, it would be rather comical as one could expect the overall explanation to be linked to some Euphonic effects.

 

I mentioned the same thing a while back. Now I'm wondering, can I tune into different radio stations with it? Would classical radio make my DAC sound better than, say, rock when injected into its ground plane? Does NPR produce better euphonic effect than sports radio? So many new things to try! 

 

[chauphuong]

For those who understandably doubt. When I touched the aluminum case of my PC I got electrical shock. Then I bought a ground box similar to the Aucharm stuff linked somewhere in 1st or 2nd page of this topic. No shock anymore even when I use my tongue to test (and that was why I did not bother to test scientifically with a meter).

[Cornan]

3 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I mentioned the same thing a while back. Now I'm wondering, can I tune into different radio stations with it? Would classical radio make my DAC sound better than, say, rock when injected into its ground plane? Does NPR produce better euphonic effect than sports radio? So many new things to try! 

 

 

Just to make you happy. Here is an Entreq product that is constructed as a antenna, but it should be connected to their grounding boxes.

 

http://www.kosmic.us/entreq-receivus.html

 

[Cornan]

@Daudio

The "mysterious" part of the grounding boxes is what makes them so interesting IMO. I know they work wonders on a "good" spots which requires a experiments in different places in the setup. It is NOT just a matter of plug it in anywhere and enjoy the music. On certain very isolated (ex. floating AC/DC, galvanicly isolated inputs & outputs) spots a grounding box can also make it sound worse. My Entreq Minimus have moved to new spots during my upgrades since it did'nt improve things anymore. It have ended up in the network switch right now where it still makes a great improvement, even though it is completely isolated. Do not ask me why!

 

The way I see it the grounding box is similar to a grounding rod, but with selected minerals and with a slightly different and less "heavy duty" purpose. 

 

 

[Cornan]

I have noticed a similarity between grounding boxes and USB GND lift. I always used unshielded twisted pair USB cables without 5v and lifted the GND. After getting all the AC/DC paths and ICs isolated (incl. router) the GND lift did'nt improve anymore. It was actually better with it. This is exactly what happens with a grounding box in the same circumstances. Grounding boxes have similar effects as a GND lift.

[marce]

1 hour ago, Cornan said:

 

Just to make you happy. Here is an Entreq product that is constructed as a antenna, but it should be connected to their grounding boxes.

 

http://www.kosmic.us/entreq-receivus.html

 

Just thrown away my copy of electromagnetic compatibility engineering... Obviously all I have been taught on EMC etc. has been wrong over the years.

Goodbye.

[Speedskater]

12 hours ago, YashN said:

I did mention the possibility of an Entreq working as an antenna. In that case, it would be rather comical as one could expect the overall explanation to be linked to some Euphonic effects.

Did you actually do a test though instead of making lists about why it shouldn't work?

Because I did in my system with a rudimentary DIY solution.

I didn't do the tests, Amir did:

http://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/entreq-signal-grounding-preliminary-measurements.476/

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

As for interference problems, they are probably rare and situation specific. Just rearranging the equipment on a different style rack could change the problem.

[Speedskater]

7 hours ago, marce said:

Just thrown away my copy of electromagnetic compatibility engineering... Obviously all I have been taught on EMC etc. has been wrong over the years.

Goodbye.

And think of the mistakes that Maxwell, Heaviside, Ohm & Kirchhoff  made.

[Jud]

18 hours ago, marce said:

Another problem is how is the noise differentiated from signal? Once noise gets into the signal it can not be differentiated from the signal apart from some sort of frequency filtering, if the noise is at the same frequencies as the signal in cannot be removed without effecting the signal, so the first rule of EMC is STOP the noise getting in (and out).

 

@marce, are there ways noise in the MHz frequency range might adversely affect audio that you know of?

[Daudio]

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

@marce, are there ways noise in the MHz frequency range might adversely affect audio that you know of?

 

Please don't feed the trolls.

 

Yashn's thread is a more welcome place for Objectionist concerns and mocking.