Entreq Tellus grounding,in england

[jkeny]

Except knowing the source (and the mechanism by which it arises) of what the box is purported to help with greatly informs one's understanding of it.

Really, anything having to do with noise or grounding is a multi-component affair.

This issue here is linked to chassis grounding, and some people think chassis-grounding solves it, except in reality and in some systems, some of the issue still persists despite excellent chassis-grounding. (AFAIK)

And to really understand why SE systems are more likely to benefit from an Entreq solution, one has to really understand the benefits of balanced.

To dig further, there's an issue in XLR connections which also sheds more light in how things work in a multi-component system.

Some of the literature I found to be most interesting regarding all this is to be found online by Ott, Armstrong, Brown, Whitlock and Geddings (hope I spelled it right).

One can and should start by understanding properly what a return current is and how it flows.

Exactly so!
It always amazes me why people are so quick to dismiss such devices with all sorts of reasons & don't look behind the marketing or pricing to try to examine what may be occurring which is affecting the perceived sound.
It's the same meme as is found on most audio forums - those who report hearing differences being insulted at the attitude of those who claim it is impossible & then the usual ilo wars begin.
The whole area of multi-device grounding is what should be the question & not flippant throwaways like "if the Entreq makes an audible difference then your system is broken" - this is a lazy mantra that could be applied to any improvement in sound heard by changing any playback device

So, yes, all of the writers on grounding that you mention are relevant but I doubt there will be any serious discussion of this important area as the people who are currently acting as self-proclaimed oracles in this matter would only expose their ignorance in this area

 

[jkeny]

Thanks JK you have confirmed you dont know.

Your silly playground tactic will not hide the fact that you are either uninterested in analysing the Intona device or incapable.

 

[jkeny]

Are you really trying to compare Entreq and Intona, one is a properly engineered device that does exactly what is states, and the other a box filled with unspecified material and a bent coat hanger?
Start another thread fortune USB isolator in the measurement section of the forum .
Keith.

Keith, is this how you choose devices which you sell - "properly engineered" without any consideration for how it affects sonics? So you sell a device "competently engineered" for use in industrial & medical environments - does it do anything for audio?

I can sell you a "properly engineered" wire - interested?

I can see how this works as a sales tactic but I'm interested in how some device will improve my audio perception.
Why not show us the measurements of the Intona on the analogue out of a DAC & prove to us that it actually does improve audio or are you saying that we should just listen ?

And if you can show this, why wouldn't proper grounding of multi devices do the same job - just as is being suggested for the Entreq?

 

[BE718]

Your silly playground tactic will not hide the fact that you are either uninterested in analysing the Intona device or incapable.

Jk, you stated there were deficiencies in the Intona design, I just asked you what you thought they were.

 

[jkeny]

Jk, you stated there were deficiencies in the Intona design, I just asked you what you thought they were.

And I told you that the socratic method of learning was applicable - do you not understand what this is?

 

[jkeny]

Keith, you bandy about this phrase of yours "competently engineered" as if you know what you are talking about
Do you know what engineering a product is about? Are products engineered to meet specific goals?
So your phrase is meaningless unless the specific goal is stated "competently engineered to ......."
Can you fill in the dots?

 

[Purite Audio]

John this is a thread about the Entreq grounding box , start another thread if you wish to discuss the Intona Hi-Speed USB isolator.
Keith.

 

[jkeny]

John this is a thread about the Entreq grounding box , start another thread if you wish to discuss the Intona Hi-Speed USB isolator.
Keith.

Yes, let's bring all this discussion over to the Intona measurements thread which died!!

But, Keith, you are here discussing grounding & comparing the "competent engineering" of a box which you sell (Intona) to the Entreq - both boxes seem to focus on the same ground issue (although you are coy about stating what the Intona actually does for audio).

It has been suggested that the Entreq, if it works at all, can be emulated by a grounding wires between device chassis & star ground (a suggestion I don't find outrageous). And although I would like to see this claim proven, does the same claim not apply to all devices which have some effect on ground noise (which includes the Intona)?

 

[Purite Audio]

Daniel Staemmler of Intona is incredibly helpful, If you have any questions as to the design of the Intona why not pose them yourself,his contact email address is on the Intona website.
I make absolutely no claims that the Intona will universally improve sound quality in every system, there are just too many variables.
I am certain that the Intona isolator does everything that the designer claims, HiSpeed USB data transfer and galvanic isolation.
To try and compare the Intona isolator and the Entreq box is beyond ridiculous.
Keith.

 

[jkeny]

Daniel Staemmler of Intona is incredibly helpful, If you have any questions as to the design of the Intona why not pose them yourself,his contact email address is on the Intona website.
I make absolutely no claims that the Intona will universally improve sound quality in every system, there are just too many variables.
I am certain that the Intona isolator does everything that the designer claims, HiSpeed USB data transfer and galvanic isolation.
To try and compare the Intona isolator and the Entreq box is beyond ridiculous.
Keith.

Keith, I'm asking you as you sell the devices (& presumably stock them for some reason & are not a snakeoil salesman) - what does the Intona do for audio? Pick any system you like & give us the specifics of what the Intona will improve - I'm not asking you "will it universally improve sound quality in every system", I'm just asking to give us an example audio system that it will audibly improve & how?

 

[amirm]

No, I never said that. I said they were recorded using the same source material using precisely the same equipment and using precisely the same process. The only difference being the presence of the box or lack thereof.

But that is not the only difference. As I mentioned, in the demag thread, we demonstrated conclusively to everyone's satisfaction that run to run of an LP on Gary's expensive turntable made very audible and provable differences. And it were those differences that we were hearing, not anything that LP demagnetization had done.

I don't think anyone knew and appreciated this fact and how significant play to play variations were. I even did a blind test and the difference was solidly there.

In my opinion then, no such test is valid with analog source. You need to use digital so that we rule this out.

Can I ask why you and others completely and utterly dismiss the subjective listening impressions of myself and others, yet you are happy to provide your own subjective listening opinion to reinforce your "measurement" view? That seems extremely hypocritical to me.

We are just trying to investigate what is going on. If you stay patient with us, just as in de-mag thread we may arrive at a proper conclusion that both sides agree to. In the above scenario, I am even giving you 100% credit that your subjective impressions are right, yet can demonstrate how that may not at all be due to entreq.

 

[Barry2013]

In the above post I questioned why it was acceptable to judge cables on the basis of listening experience but not to do the same for Entreq/Tripont boxes and nobody has responded to that.
With the exception of impedance values and the sensitivity of some amplifier designs I am not aware of scientific measurements of cables being a factor in evaluations of cables but I am happy to be corrected if that is not the case.
MIT and Tara Labs employ boxes which they claim improve the sound quality of their expensive cables and although I have never tried them I am aware that they have a very good reputation and have been well reviewed. Again I am not aware of anybody questioning their science in the way that Entreq's is being questioned and yet the purpose is the same namely signal grounding. Can anybody explain that?
As noted above Entreq's claimed operation is signal grounding not mains grounding. The use of the term grounding may explain some of the hostility directed at Entreq and it being judged against a technical basis of mains grounding which is and obviously has been very important for safety reasons amongst others. But is that the correct basis for evaluating signal grounding and which as I say has not been questioned in the case of MIT and Tara Labs.
If the technical critics of Entreq make no similar criticisms of MIT and Tara Labs what should we conclude?
It maybe that the term grounding is part of the problem and that if one looked at it from a filtration point of view that perspective might provide a more accessible technical basis for looking at Entreq.
Over to you BE718

Don't seem to have had any response from you BE718

 

[Folsom]

I do use the Entreq Poseidon which is connected to the negative speaker terminals. it makes a subtle positive difference to my ears.

I've not experimented with 'location' of the Entreq boxes themselves if that is what you are asking. but if you are wanting for me to have them connected to the front of my gear, I will point out that Entreq is primarily intended to be for 'signal path' grounding, not chassis grounding. unused output jacks are only on the rear faceplates.

I apologize if I've misunderstood your question.

Not at all, it's me who doesn't fully understand the Entreq product lines.

I suppose they only experiment I can think of is to try placing the Poseidon to the right or left, if possible. And then placing it in front of the amplifier so the wires coming away from the amp have minimal exposure everything behind the amplifier. That's what my curiosity I suppose has been reduced too.

BTW you may have star grounding in your system. It all depends on if each AC receptacle has it's own separate ground wire running back to the common meeting point in your circuit breaker box. But also I should note that even if you have separate ground rod for it, the safety ground is still tied to neutral in the main circuit breaker box of a home. It's required for circuit breakers to work.

Even if they are not, it'll make little to no difference if only your audio gear shares the particular ground. It's things that are noisy that would/could be on the same line that cause an issue for the most part. In fact sometimes long star grounding runs increase noise if there isn't a shared common point in say a power conditioner or AC distribution box because small currents can be formed between devices that run back to the circuit breaker box to connect. That's not necessarily a mistake made by the audio designer, it can be a fault of the requirements for appliances that interfere with designs. The way our safety grounding system works isn't based on low noise, it's based on safety - hence the name.

Anyway, as I continue on... all I'm really saying is your grounding scheme might be perfectly fine so you can probably skip the concerns that the Entreq doing whatever it does for you is directly related to a fault in your setup.

BTW I find that idea of saying the Entreq's fix faults particularly entertaining if the other premise is they're "placebo" (not a conclusion I can make yet). Don't you?

 

[Purite Audio]

Barry if cables are constructed with normal electrical parameters L,C,R they will be transparent in the lengths used for domestic audio.
Manufactureres can and do change these parameters , enough for the cables to act as a primitive tone control and change the sound .
No one has been able to consistently select unsighted cables with similar electrical parameters.
Unsighted comparisons removes sighted bias, have you ever tried to compare unsighted theeffect or otherwise of Entreq components in your own system?
Keith.

 

[Folsom]

So we're not considering the possibility that Mike L and the gang aren't completely imagining the positive effects from this equipment? This is exactly my take on this, and products like the REGEN. I'm not doubting these guys are hearing a difference. What it tells me is there's obviously some weak links in the engineering of the audio gear to begin with, if they are actually hearing a difference with the addition of these external tweaks. A well engineered product shouldn't need these devices to achieve peak performance.

This might mean something if you knew what the Entreq does (if it works). But you can make arguments like a well engineered product shouldn't need high quality AC receptacles to achieve peak performance, too. It's dribble. Furthermore there's a massive subjective clause.

Yeah I was reading a great article on star grounding for an audio system and the wonderful benefits it brought. But I can't find it now. You will never get a better ground than the earth itself. There's also chemicals you can pour around the ground rod to help with the conduction. Keeping it wet also helps. Run the irrigation system on the ground rods as well. You could probably use moisture sensors to automatically maintain the perfect level of ground moisture around the rods.

You know that safety ground connects to neutral in the circuit breaker box right? Star grounding is good in general, true. But you make it sound like ground plays some integral part of making a stereo good. The reality is that it's just as often we're trying to prevent it from being a source of noise, and are subject to its existence simply because of safety reasons that may be nearly inapplicable to our appliances. There's quiet a bit of gear out there that doesn't even have safety ground, and sounds great. Ground isn't a magical thing that just sucks bad stuff out of stereos. In fact inside appliances you have to direct (safety) ground so that it doesn't happen through critical devices (a source of noise).

Recording studios work hard to keep ground from being a source of noise, so they actually do the types of things you're talking about with the ground rod. It lowers the noise floor, but it does so just as much because of the noise caused from ground as the noise from other things. It's all back to the requirement of having to have it.

 

[Barry2013]

Barry if cables are constructed with normal electrical parameters L,C,R they will be transparent in the lengths used for domestic audio.
Manufactureres can and do change these parameters , enough for the cables to act as a primitive tone control and change the sound .
No one has been able to consistently select unsighted cables with similar electrical parameters.
Unsighted comparisons removes sighted bias, have you ever tried to compare unsighted theeffect or otherwise of Entreq components in your own system?
Keith.

Thanks Keith.
My first experience of Entreq was completely unplanned and unexpected and I had never heard of Entreq at all. They were a complete unknown so there was no question of expectation bias.
When a Silver Minmus was connected, not that I knew what it was at that stage, a change for the better in the sound was very quickly audible to my ears.
Since then I have been satisfied at the further improvements from additional Entreq boxes, earth cables, signal cables which are earthed to the Entreq boxes, and their mains cables and I imagine that resultant synergy also plays its part.
When I changed the Konstantin i/cs for balanced Apollo i/cs there was a very clear improvement in the transparency, instrumental delineation and body of the sound. More music and a more natural and true sound.
Similar benefits from upgrading to Challenger speaker cables and more recently to Poseidon negative amplifier speaker terminal grounding.
Others who have heard my system have said it does sound good. Some of those prefer tubes to my Vitus SIA 025 which I have no problem with. We all have our individual tastes.
I have not felt the need to undertake unsighted tests which is not unusual for Entreq users and I accept that may cause some to doubt my ears, but I am content to trust them.
The fact that so many Entreq users find the same or similar benefits I believe validates my experience.
As I have said reviews of cables depend upon what people hear and not on measurements. I am sure that if there were generally accepted measures or techniques which provided a valid and reliable basis for assessing the quality of sound from different cables it would be widely used. In their continued absence we rely upon what we hear however frustrating that may be to those who crave measurements, but who like the rest of us make their cable buying decisions on what they hear.
Presumably you do the same?

 

[jkeny]

This might mean something if you knew what the Entreq does (if it works). But you can make arguments like a well engineered product shouldn't need high quality AC receptacles to achieve peak performance, too. It's dribble. Furthermore there's a massive subjective clause.

Absolutely - it's symptomatic of the drivel that we see on threads here

You know that safety ground connects to neutral in the circuit breaker box right? Star grounding is good in general, true. But you make it sound like ground plays some integral part of making a stereo good. The reality is that it's just as often we're trying to prevent it from being a source of noise, and are subject to its existence simply because of safety reasons that may be nearly inapplicable to our appliances. There's quiet a bit of gear out there that doesn't even have safety ground, and sounds great. Ground isn't a magical thing that just sucks bad stuff out of stereos. In fact inside appliances you have to direct (safety) ground so that it doesn't happen through critical devices (a source of noise).

Recording studios work hard to keep ground from being a source of noise, so they actually do the types of things you're talking about with the ground rod. It lowers the noise floor, but it does so just as much because of the noise caused from ground as the noise from other things. It's all back to the requirement of having to have it.

As you say, the idea that ground is some magic sinkhole is laughable. The confusion of ground with the actual earth itself is also laughable.
So called ground, which is badly named, is the return path for current either low-level signal or much higher currents from power supplies. One other complication is that this ground is considered to be 0 volts & considered a reference point for signals. There is absolutely no need for rods driven into the earth. What is required, however, is that signal ground reference is steady & doesn't fluctuate. The mixing of PS ground returns with signal ground returns is one of the major causes of audible issues in audio devices. Mix in the safety issue requirements of grounds & there are 3 competing requirements. There are therefore many ways that less than optimal grounding design might arise & all could be considered "bad engineering design" if one had a binary way of thinking about reality but I wonder just how many audio devices (even ones in Purite's inventory) have such issues? This whole area of current flows has become even more complicated with the advent of even higher speed signalling between chips. In high speed signals the return current pathways need careful consideration which slower speed signals didn't necessitate. So, with the advent of faster signalling in digital audio devices, new challenges are posed.

When it comes to multi-device connections, the grounding complications are multiplied. Differential ground potentials, shield current induced noise become issues along with RFI & other issues.

Dismissing ground issues to lack of "competent engineering" is ignoring the real world of audio devices. The fact of the matter is that the ordinary consumer is not in a position to know which audio devices have considered all grounding problems & dealt with them competently - will Keith give you such a guarantee on the "competently engineered" devices he sells? In the absence of these guarantees, a device that improves grounding issues serves two purposes - it draws attention to the issue & might suggest that you can address, some if not all, of the ground issues in other ways - it provides a way for those less technically minded to achieve some improvements.

All of the above applies to all devices that are directed towards ground issues - the Entreq & Intona being just two.

 

[Purite Audio]

Thanks Keith.
My first experience of Entreq was completely unplanned and unexpected and I had never heard of Entreq at all. They were a complete unknown so there was no question of expectation bias.
When a Silver Minmus was connected, not that I knew what it was at that stage, a change for the better in the sound was very quickly audible to my ears.
Since then I have been satisfied at the further improvements from additional Entreq boxes, earth cables, signal cables which are earthed to the Entreq boxes, and their mains cables and I imagine that resultant synergy also plays its part.
When I changed the Konstantin i/cs for balanced Apollo i/cs there was a very clear improvement in the transparency, instrumental delineation and body of the sound. More music and a more natural and true sound.
Similar benefits from upgrading to Challenger speaker cables and more recently to Poseidon negative amplifier speaker terminal grounding.
Others who have heard my system have said it does sound good. Some of those prefer tubes to my Vitus SIA 025 which I have no problem with. We all have our individual tastes.
I have not felt the need to undertake unsighted tests which is not unusual for Entreq users and I accept that may cause some to doubt my ears, but I am content to trust them.
The fact that so many Entreq users find the same or similar benefits I believe validates my experience.
As I have said reviews of cables depend upon what people hear and not on measurements. I am sure that if there were generally accepted measures or techniques which provided a valid and reliable basis for assessing the quality of sound from different cables it would be widely used. In their continued absence we rely upon what we hear however frustrating that may be to those who crave measurements, but who like the rest of us make their cable buying decisions on what they hear.
Presumably you do the same?

Barry Hi, I have to ask have you ever sat and listened to your system while someone else connected and disconnected the grounding boxes, without you being able to see ?
Honestly that is the true test, if there is a difference you will be able to spot when the grounding boxes are connected every single time.
Keith.

 

[jkeny]

Yes, Barry, do what Keith does with all devices he sells - blind tests them to be sure that he can routinely differentiate them - "that is the true test".
Get him to tell you about some of these tests & the results he has obtained - I'm sure you'll find it interesting

 

[Barry2013]

Yes, Barry, do what Keith does with all devices he sells - blind tests them to be sure that he can routinely differentiate them - "that is the true test".
Get him to tell you about some of these tests & the results he has obtained - I'm sure you'll find it interesting

Thanks JK
Over to you Keith