Tripoint troy signature grounding device

[spiritofmusic]

Geardaddy, I contend you'll find if you open up a Troy or an Entreq, you'll find more similarities than differences. Plates/wiring of Silver and Copper interspersed/packed w/minerals/chemicals. I have no way to prove this, both companies are never going to agree to opening their boxes. But it's a valid assumption. There may be differences in composition, but the bulk will be similar. Tbh, they are both trying to mimic the ground post buried dozens of feet down into the earth to the water table if we could all ground our systems out into the garden.
Troy has marketed itself as chassis-, Entreq as signal-grounding. Now it seems both companies are claiming they do both.
So in more ways than they are not, I believe they are interchangeable/equivalent tech, but of course one will be more attractive sounding than another in any particular system.
Surely you're not arguing that they are different like analog v digital, SS v tubes?

 

[Barry2013]

That makes little sense. Chassis grounding seems to be an issue in Asia where the lions share of Tripoint has been sold. There are many audiophiles who have been exposed to both Entreq and Tripoint, and Tripoint seems to be king of the hill. They are not viewed as interchangeable or equivalent technologies. I recommend starting a thread dedicated to this subject on Audioexotics and see what kind of feedback you get.

It was simply a statement of fact of the position here and as far as I know in the rest of Europe.

 

[Geardaddy]

Geardaddy, I contend you'll find if you open up a Troy or an Entreq, you'll find more similarities than differences. Plates/wiring of Silver and Copper interspersed/packed w/minerals/chemicals. I have no way to prove this, both companies are never going to agree to opening their boxes. But it's a valid assumption. There may be differences in composition, but the bulk will be similar. Tbh, they are both trying to mimic the ground post buried dozens of feet down into the earth to the water table if we could all ground our systems out into the garden.
Troy has marketed itself as chassis-, Entreq as signal-grounding. Now it seems both companies are claiming they do both.
So in more ways than they are not, I believe they are interchangeable/equivalent tech, but of course one will be more attractive sounding than another in any particular system.
Surely you're not arguing that they are different like analog v digital, SS v tubes?

For edification purposes and a shared body of knowledge, I challenge you to start that thread on AE unless of course you are chicken. Clouding up a Tripoint thread with more verbiage about Entreq no longer has any merit. Ciao.....

 

[TBG]

I have not clue why you would say your assumption is "valid" that within the Entreq and the Signature they are similar. Even ss and tube circuits are similar as they involve wire, caps, etc. It is also true that signal and chassis grounding are similar. Where does this get you? It is also, I think, invalid that some systems will favor one and others the other. I expect that I will soon get a to hear both in my system. Maybe that will settle this for me.

 

[LL21]

I have not clue why you would say your assumption is "valid" that within the Entreq and the Signature they are similar. Even ss and tube circuits are similar as they involve wire, caps, etc. It is also true that signal and chassis grounding are similar. Where does this get you? It is also, I think, invalid that some systems will favor one and others the other. I expect that I will soon get a to hear both in my system. Maybe that will settle this for me.

Look forward to your thoughts...i have shared mine in the past somewhere buried in this site. I like them both...and as some know, have ended up using the Troy Signature with Thor PC & its standard 4 grounding cables that come with it...plus a series of Atlantis cables for signal ground...and a series of Entreq Receivus which are also connected to the Troy Sig. 14 connections in all...a record according to Miguel!

 

[dmnc02]

Look forward to your thoughts...i have shared mine in the past somewhere buried in this site. I like them both...and as some know, have ended up using the Troy Signature with Thor PC & its standard 4 grounding cables that come with it...plus a series of Atlantis cables for signal ground...and a series of Entreq Receivus which are also connected to the Troy Sig. 14 connections in all...a record according to Miguel!

Lloyd, could you comment a bit on what the Receivus does? Is it for chassis grounding of components that do not have an accessible grounded screw or is it something else?

It might perhaps be better to post this info in the Entreq thread in order not to keep derailing this one.

 

[LL21]

Lloyd, could you comment a bit on what the Receivus does? Is it for chassis grounding of components that do not have an accessible grounded screw or is it something else?

It might perhaps be better to post this info in the Entreq thread in order not to keep derailing this one.

I will comment on both because i find them to work well together:

1. The Receivus (to a non-techie like me) seems to be some kind of antenna-like thing...an oval disc that sits on top of equipment with a grounding wire connected to it that is then attached to the grounding box. As an antenna...i suppose it acts like some kind of hoover for emi/rfi?

that's a non-techie interpretation...like a caveman seeing an F-16 for the first time and guessing.

2. What it does in terms of sound is very very much like what signal grounding does...except that it not only works on equipment like my Gryphon (which has neither an extra set of inputs for signal grounding nor a chassis screw)...it ALSO further improved when on my 4-box Zanden (each Zanden box has one on top)...and each time it got that much better. Same effect: lower noise, greater detail, more natural decay, and better more natural beginning and ending of notes...

I suppose there is still emi/rfi that abounds in and around the unit (may even be generated by the unit?)...and the Receivus just picks it up and dumps it into the grounding box?

 

[TBG]

LL21, I used to have an Acoustic Revive piece called the Grounding Conditioner RGC-24. It did some good with the location of the puck being most important. I sold my two of them after a couple of years. I wonder if the Receivus is related. I have bought and sold several other Acoustic Revive pieces, such as the RTP-6 power distributor, and the RR-77 Ultra Low Freq. Generator. All did some good things, but not much.

 

[LL21]

LL21, I used to have an Acoustic Revive piece called the Grounding Conditioner RGC-24. It did some good with the location of the puck being most important. I sold my two of them after a couple of years. I wonder if the Receivus is related. I have bought and sold several other Acoustic Revive pieces, such as the RTP-6 power distributor, and the RR-77 Ultra Low Freq. Generator. All did some good things, but not much.

I cannot say about Acoustic Revive as i have never tried. What i can say is that adding an Entreq Receivus was akin to adding an Atlantis...worked very well.

 

[TBG]

Yeah, and I have sold the Acoustic Revive piece called the Grounding Conditioner RGC-24. Too bad!

 

[spiritofmusic]

Geardaddy, I'll pick up your toys and put them calmly back in your pram. I have no desire to get on to the AE guys, arguing on this forum is enough for me, thanks. Maybe you can tell me what comments you object to. I never said Troy isn't different from Entreq, I said my contention is they have similarities, both approximating to an uber version of the ground post in 20' of soil model. I wouldn't be surprised if Troy has more expensive materials/unobtanium inside it, but it seems logical that they are designed along similar principles. How is this an attack on Troy?
And, btw, if you don't get it already, Tripoint and Entreq are BOTH benefitting from these combative comments. It's all publicity - there's no such thing as bad publicity.
Now, I'm going to take a nap in the chicken coop. Ciao...

 

[DRC]

Guys, I think we should be looking for common ground rather than debate which system is better or the best. I use the Tripoint Signature myself and I am very happy with it. I have never heard the Entreq which doesn't mean this system is flawed in any way nor necessarily inferior to Tripoint. Remember, hifi systems are complex so what's not to say that Entreq may work better in one system and the Tripoint in another? It reminds me of people trying to argue whether a Ferrari is better or a Porsche. This argument is truly endless and rather pointless as each generation of new product outdoes the previous generation of the other... and you gotta compare straight line performance or lap time around the track or in the wet vs dry Silverstone vs Monaco etc...Musical and system performance is even harder to measure objectively. The key however is in recognizing that perhaps there is real merit in what both Entreq and Tripoint are doing for high end audio. I personally applaud both brands without reservations nor judgement.

 

[Barry2013]

+1

 

[LL21]

Guys, I think we should be looking for common ground rather than debate which system is better or the best. I use the Tripoint Signature myself and I am very happy with it. I have never heard the Entreq which doesn't mean this system is flawed in any way nor necessarily inferior to Tripoint. Remember, hifi systems are complex so what's not to say that Entreq may work better in one system and the Tripoint in another? It reminds me of people trying to argue whether a Ferrari is better or a Porsche. This argument is truly endless and rather pointless as each generation of new product outdoes the previous generation of the other... and you gotta compare straight line performance or lap time around the track or in the wet vs dry Silverstone vs Monaco etc...Musical and system performance is even harder to measure objectively. The key however is in recognizing that perhaps there is real merit in what both Entreq and Tripoint are doing for high end audio. I personally applaud both brands without reservations nor judgement.

very well said...

 

[spiritofmusic]

God, I've come to the sanctuary of the Troy thread to escape the chaos on the Entreq thread THAT I ORIGINATED, LOL!!!
Agreed, Troy and Entreq are helping us all get inside the music more deeply. They're both fantastic products, and those looking for an enhancement to take their system to the next level should not ignore the potentially radical benefits that both products offer.
I think any acrimony btwn the proponents of both is unfortunate, I guess it's good the stuff provokes such positive reactions in all of us.

 

[dmnc02]

Given that Entreq and Tripoint are somewhat similar in what they try to achieve (if not in execution) and largely misunderstood, I too feel that it would be very beneficial to have more cross-pollination across the two threads in terms of exchange of valuable users' experience with these two lines of products.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Dmnc02, agreed, I've just posted on my Entreq thread that the mission statements of Entreq, Troy, and Shunyata as well, and the limited tech info I can glean from them, seem to point twds trying to eliminate gremlins as close to their origin as possible (i.e. signal-plane/chassis-plane), and hence there must be more similarities than differences in what's trying to be acheived/results gained. This may still actually result in vast differences in performance gains btwn the three brands depending on any given system, but I think the 3 companies are on parallel paths in getting to grips w/getting us all to a new frontier of more noise-free and music-rich sound.
I do feel that these 3 brands are approaching the electrical side of things totally differently from the more traditional beefed up transformer/mains regeneration/standard conditioning and filtering approaches that we were relying solely on up to a few yrs ago. My opinion is that addressing the mains directly w/approaches like Equi=Tech, Torus, Westwick, PS Audio, Isotek, Vertex AQ, Audience etc etc, will be enhanced to even greater heights getting to grips w/the component borne issues via Entreq, Troy, Shunyata. Getting both sides right like I am starting to do, provides hard to believe benefits, and the synergy can be quite startling.

 

[DRC]

Dmnc02, agreed, I've just posted on my Entreq thread that the mission statements of Entreq, Troy, and Shunyata as well, and the limited tech info I can glean from them, seem to point twds trying to eliminate gremlins as close to their origin as possible (i.e. signal-plane/chassis-plane), and hence there must be more similarities than differences in what's trying to be acheived/results gained. This may still actually result in vast differences in performance gains btwn the three brands depending on any given system, but I think the 3 companies are on parallel paths in getting to grips w/getting us all to a new frontier of more noise-free and music-rich sound.
I do feel that these 3 brands are approaching the electrical side of things totally differently from the more traditional beefed up transformer/mains regeneration/standard conditioning and filtering approaches that we were relying solely on up to a few yrs ago. My opinion is that addressing the mains directly w/approaches like Equi=Tech, Torus, Westwick, PS Audio, Isotek, Vertex AQ, Audience etc etc, will be enhanced to even greater heights getting to grips w/the component borne issues via Entreq, Troy, Shunyata. Getting both sides right like I am starting to do, provides hard to believe benefits, and the synergy can be quite startling.

Hi Spiritofmusic,

Total agree with you! I am taking a system wide approach - I have earthing sorted out for now with my Tripoint signature. Next, I plan to evaluate various Troy and Dalby Earthing cables to see if these truly do make a significant difference in my system and worth the money. I also plan to try some VertexAQ products to see if their Grounding components will work well in conjunction with my Tripoint system with additional benefits. I also have a VertexAQ Hirez Taga on order as well which will get passive filtration via my Lessloss Firewall- Hope to have this in place by Christmas.

Finally, I would like to compare Stillpoints isolation philosophy vs VertexAQs Leading Edge Platform which drains vibrations/noise into the platform labyrinth as opposed to isolating.

Honestly, I don't really care what I use. If it improves my system substantially, I am game. Lets hope we have succeeded in taking the first steps towards world peace!!!

 

[spiritofmusic]

DRC. If it helps, I now integrate a dedicated consumer unit, radial main, Westwick 8kVA balanced power transformer, Entreq grounding and a Burmester 948 power conditioner into a really successful package. My power components only, come off the transformer, so there is no chance of peak current limitation, and source components/mono preamps/AV rig only, off the Burmester (which itself comes off the transformer), so I get the benefit of conditioning to kit where peak current is not an issue. This is giving me full bass weight and substance (the transformer), midtrange and treble clarity (Entreq grounding, and Burmester). At this point I'm happy to stick, but will investigate a little further to complete the power treatment cycle by grounding/filtering the mains PASSIVELY via Entreq Cleanus from Westwick to Tellus via an Apollo lead.
I very nearly went down the Vertex route, but somehow Entreq loomed into view at the same time, and my ability to get the decisive home trial happened more easily w/Entreq. The rest is history.
Take a look at the AE forum, it seems a lot of perfectionist Asian high end consumers are combining Troy w/Pranawire Linebackers, and the French JLS conditioners. May be worth considering.

 

[dmnc02]

As an analog user, I have been very interested in the large sonic improvement reported by many users on the AE forum after grounding their tonearm. It would be great is somebody could chime in on this.