Entreq Tellus grounding
- Thread starter spiritofmusic
- Start date
I will be using this for grounding my amp, both signal and speaker terminals. It comes with one eartha cable but I am not clear on which grade. I also got two of the Peak 4 knobs. For the beginning I will be trying my existing Silver cables that I am using with the Chinese brand ground boxes which I have been using to test the grounding concept.
Wait a minute. The two ground posts of the Olympus Infinity are joined together internally and you CANNOT connect the two ground posts to the two negative speaker terminals of your amp.
I did mentioned that to you in an earlier post that you need separate boxes or box that has multiple individual compartments if you like to ground the negative speaker terminals.
What is the quality of your existing silver ground cables? To be honest, ground cables are VERY important as well. Your Olympus Infinity deserve to use with the Infinity Apollo as a minimum.
I did mentioned that to you in an earlier post that you need separate boxes or box that has multiple individual compartments if you like to ground the negative speaker terminals.
What is the quality of your existing silver ground cables? To be honest, ground cables are VERY important as well. Your Olympus Infinity deserve to use with the Infinity Apollo as a minimum.
Hi dts-99,
I am going to be trying the new Entreq Pluton with an eye to the Hero...do you have any experience with these? I am an owner today of Tripoint Troy Signature, but also use Entreq elsewhere in the system. But everything is nearly 10 years old now...and was intrigued to hear the latest just to see if/how much things have advanced.
Thanks for any insight as you seem quite knowledgeable about Entreq. (Will be using their reference cables when we trial this sometime next week.)
I am going to be trying the new Entreq Pluton with an eye to the Hero...do you have any experience with these? I am an owner today of Tripoint Troy Signature, but also use Entreq elsewhere in the system. But everything is nearly 10 years old now...and was intrigued to hear the latest just to see if/how much things have advanced.
Thanks for any insight as you seem quite knowledgeable about Entreq. (Will be using their reference cables when we trial this sometime next week.)
Right. Using the Olympus Infinity just for the signal ground (RCA and XLR)
Will upgrade to better cables as budget allows. The cables I have now are very good but have nothing to compare them to.
That is more reassuring.
The Olympus Infinity is very good, but you CANNOT use it for speaker output groundind as dts has advised.
The Tripoint Troy is good stuff too even though I have not heard and seen one. Base on its price point, it got to be better than the earlier Entreq models. I started with the Entreq Tellus ten years ago and moved up the ladder along the way. The Olympus line is quite a good improvement over the earlier models, then the Infinity line really catching up. Now the Tungsten line is at a new level.
I have just upgraded from the olympus Tellus and Poseidon to the Hero lately. Really happy with the improvement. Just much more quiet background, better 3D imaging. The music just more real. The Hero is such a beauty even just for the look of it!!!
You will be very happy when you try out the Pluton especially with the Infinity Apollo and up ground cables. The latest Triton ground cable is another kick ass product. I have borrowed one from the dealer and is having fun.
Thank you! I am going to be trying Pluton with Olympus cables and Peak 4 ground posts...and if we like it, then we will go thru the trouble of hefting the big Hero in for listening using the same cables and ground posts.
What I remember from my 10-year-ago auditioning 'notes'...somewhere around WBF...is that the Tripoint focused on exceptional clarity and purity of note, delineation of line...while the Entreq focused on mid-range focused purity, dimensionality and timing/rhythm, particularly in deep bass propulsive tracks where I could really hear the difference.
Weight was certainly a word I remember thinking with Entreq. Clarity of positioning of instrumentation line was what I remember with Tripoint.
What I remember from my 10-year-ago auditioning 'notes'...somewhere around WBF...is that the Tripoint focused on exceptional clarity and purity of note, delineation of line...while the Entreq focused on mid-range focused purity, dimensionality and timing/rhythm, particularly in deep bass propulsive tracks where I could really hear the difference.
Weight was certainly a word I remember thinking with Entreq. Clarity of positioning of instrumentation line was what I remember with Tripoint.
Last edited:
Yes, I am trialing a whole bunch of them right now...in the latest Entreq Pluton and Olympus Infinity Tungsten...stock, vs Everest vs Peak 4. Pretty much prefer the Peak 4 over the Everest which occasionally can sound a touch thin despite its quite lively sound. In 2 cases, I have taken the less clear stock over the Everest because it seemed to tip the balance just out of the original more weighty standard of the original sound of the system which I aim (as much as possible) to preserve as a base line.
The Peak 4 by contrast seems to maintain the original tonal balance/color better than the Everest while also creating similar gains in detail, a fleet-of-foot EASE which is what Entreq does well generally...and also with a certain amount of solidity/density/impact.
My understanding is some who have auditioned have nearly always done a wholesale replacement of original Everest with Peak 4. We never had many Everests originally...but true to that form, appear likely to end up with none...and all Peak 4s.
Currently auditioning:
- Chassis Zanden + Torus: Tripoint Troy SE (own)
- Signal Grounding of System + Robert Koda: Dual Entreq Plutons with Olympus grounding cables and Peak 4s
The Peak 4 by contrast seems to maintain the original tonal balance/color better than the Everest while also creating similar gains in detail, a fleet-of-foot EASE which is what Entreq does well generally...and also with a certain amount of solidity/density/impact.
My understanding is some who have auditioned have nearly always done a wholesale replacement of original Everest with Peak 4. We never had many Everests originally...but true to that form, appear likely to end up with none...and all Peak 4s.
Currently auditioning:
- Chassis Zanden + Torus: Tripoint Troy SE (own)
- Signal Grounding of System + Robert Koda: Dual Entreq Plutons with Olympus grounding cables and Peak 4s
Lloyd
I hope you enjoy the trial with Pluton, Olympus T and Peak 4s and that you will find and get the impact you looking for.
I also want to give a tip to all of you who wants to test neg speaker grounding, but think it´s to complicated and expensive.
We now have a dedicated entry kit “ Macro Twin Kit “ that include all you need for do neg speaker grounding. Cables and boxes in one kit, just unpack, plug in and play.
The cost in Scandinavia is 8 000 Sek.
Well, I don’t know if it is the current situation in the world or it´s just the fact that I slowly reach the point where enough is enough that made me so upset when I read in another thread here on the forum about neg speaker grounding.
Interesting review from Marshall Nack at Positive Feedback of the new Fono Acustica Compas speaker grounding box (link below), which he finds to have a different impact on his system than the "usual suspects" grounding boxes (e.g., Nordost Qkore, Entreq). The only other speaker-specific grounding box I'm aware of is Tripoint's $40K/pr. Empress.
I have never heard about this guy, Marshall Nack. Never!
As far as I know, this guy, like many others who write and talk, has never tested anything from us.
But still they claims they knows Entreq well.
Suspect? Pleas tell me what is suspect.
There are way too many reviewers write and talk as if they had driven up a cudgel very deep some place where it´s dark and warm and for sure not comfortable have a cudgel.
Looks like they think that will compensate for their ignorance.
I hope you enjoy the trial with Pluton, Olympus T and Peak 4s and that you will find and get the impact you looking for.
I also want to give a tip to all of you who wants to test neg speaker grounding, but think it´s to complicated and expensive.
We now have a dedicated entry kit “ Macro Twin Kit “ that include all you need for do neg speaker grounding. Cables and boxes in one kit, just unpack, plug in and play.
The cost in Scandinavia is 8 000 Sek.
Well, I don’t know if it is the current situation in the world or it´s just the fact that I slowly reach the point where enough is enough that made me so upset when I read in another thread here on the forum about neg speaker grounding.
Interesting review from Marshall Nack at Positive Feedback of the new Fono Acustica Compas speaker grounding box (link below), which he finds to have a different impact on his system than the "usual suspects" grounding boxes (e.g., Nordost Qkore, Entreq). The only other speaker-specific grounding box I'm aware of is Tripoint's $40K/pr. Empress.
I have never heard about this guy, Marshall Nack. Never!
As far as I know, this guy, like many others who write and talk, has never tested anything from us.
But still they claims they knows Entreq well.
Suspect? Pleas tell me what is suspect.
There are way too many reviewers write and talk as if they had driven up a cudgel very deep some place where it´s dark and warm and for sure not comfortable have a cudgel.
Looks like they think that will compensate for their ignorance.
Last edited:
Marshall Nack is one of the most respected reviewers in the business. I tend to trust his reviews because I've tried and owned a number of components he's reviewed and what I've heard has matched what he's reported:
Marshall Nack, Author at Positive Feedback
positive-feedback.com
Last edited:
Thank you both. I sense some frustration. I would say this:
1. The review from a very quick read seems to state the positive case for grounding. Given that there remains a lot of debate about the pros/cons and the scientific foundation for this...the fact that another article has said...'great results in grounding' is generally a good thing for high end audio and for those leading the way in grounding.
2. Entreq is a well respected leader in the industry in this particular field. As are Tripoint. And others are rapidly taking positions based on [my perception] that Tripoint and Entreq led the charge 10+ years ago with the Troy and the Silver Tellus.
3. Personally, as an admirer of Entreq's work for many years (and Tripoint), I did not read the article with any real sense of negative about non-Fono products. He liked Fono...great.
4. As for Entreq's latest work, they are stupendous. I am keeping the Tripoint Troy SE on certain chassis elements because they have been there for 10+ years and work well...why mess with a good thing? But I am intending to add [substantially] with this latest generation of Entreq Tungsten-related grounding solutions.
5. Specifically?
The system has taken on some radically cool characteristics I cannot replicate any other way. Namely:
A. Choral vocals are now substantially more understandable
- the level of articulation is better...but in a very different way than 'more detail' which one can find with different digital, cables, speakers, etc
B. the articulation now comes in the form of seemingly removing a hurdle/hinderance to the alacrity and ease with which the speaker moves. It seems like there is less 'stuff' the cones need to move thru in order to deliver a string. The string now comes thru less forced, more panel/electrostatic-like...and that is something exceedingly rare in cones. But because the cone generally brings weights/tonal density...it is shocking to hear the cone 100% completely and utterly MAINTAIN the tonal density but now with an electrostatic-like snap/speed and EASE.
C. What happens with this is that air, space, subtle shifts in piano fingering or vibrato all come to life in a way I have never experienced on a system where you simply got 'more resolving equipment'. I think many details are genuinely lost in the ability for the system to keep up the instantaneous speed required to show that split nanosecond change in breathing, of the ever-so-soft changes in keyboard pressure...
...you can get these with panels which is part of their remarkable allure...but it can be difficult sometimes to get slam, weight out of them across the entire spectrum. This is the domain where cones can do well...
...The Entreq system has somehow allowed the system to be far, far more fleet of foot/instantaneous...and a breathe of life from those mico-micro nuances now fills every element of the music from major crescendos to the subtlest of whispers
D. Suddenly in middle of a complex passage of bass rhythms, there is the most cricket-like little voice of a string being tapped (not even plucked)...and you can hear it in perfect time, sitting well back behind and underneath the main bass. Wonderful and wonderous.
- Then ADD to this a sense of ease and naturalness in voices, massed strings taking on a more gravely mix of tones that reflect numerous strings coming together...and you get a more organic sound...much more organic.
E. Relative to the Tripoint whose character seems to be obsessiveness about clarity, clarity, clarity...I find the Entreq to be about absolute ease, organic flow and this new-found alacrity which complete frees up the system to deliver heretofore undiscovered natural detail, ease, nuance to the msic...flow i suppose is a good word some have used despite it being a super-vague term
Mr. Nack's review, which is not anti-Entreq, is of a "grounding" box designed specifically for speakers. As far as I know Entreq doesn't offer a comparable device (is that correct?). The review concludes that the Fono Acustica Compas does something in the spatial domain that results in more natural sound, that he has never encountered before from any "grounding" device. As always, comparative listening not attacking the reviewer is the only way to confirm or refute his findings.
...I think the "issue" (which is perhaps too strong a word here) is that these devices don't behave like ground circuits, in the way that such things are generally taught and understood.
It's entirely fair to say: if you haven't tried one, you don't know how much they may improve sound. Fair enough.
That is reported as "true" by many, but the term: "ground" creates push-back for some. I have never tried an Entreq product, so it would be unfair and inaccurate for me to post negative comments. But certainly the term: "ground" creates confusion in my mind re: the mechanisms at work.
It's entirely fair to say: if you haven't tried one, you don't know how much they may improve sound. Fair enough.
That is reported as "true" by many, but the term: "ground" creates push-back for some. I have never tried an Entreq product, so it would be unfair and inaccurate for me to post negative comments. But certainly the term: "ground" creates confusion in my mind re: the mechanisms at work.
At some point this “issue”, i.e., the confusion caused by calling these devices “grounding” boxes when they have nothing to do with safety ground circuits, should go away. It has been explained over and over-on this forum, in manufacturers descriptions, by reviewers, etc. that what “grounding” boxes do-the only thing they do, is drain EMI/RFI. I guess it just takes time to sink in.
Gentlemen.
It makes me very happy, Entreq and Tripoint work well together, because Tripoint make in my opinion very, very good products and are in fact the only other brand, when it´s comes to grounding that I really respect.
Both our companies started work with grounding around 20 years ago. And true the years we have followed our own lines and never looked on each other’s solutions. Most of the other brands who works with grounding had only few years on the neck. And that’s OK. They can have very good products even if they are new. We all must start somewhere and I´m sure it will end up in many good new solutions.
What makes me frustrated is when guys claim that they have tested products and give an impression of knowledge when they don’t.
Also, I´ve tried to change my profil so it shows I´m a manufacturer, but I can not find how to do.
Can someone please help me with that?
It makes me very happy, Entreq and Tripoint work well together, because Tripoint make in my opinion very, very good products and are in fact the only other brand, when it´s comes to grounding that I really respect.
Both our companies started work with grounding around 20 years ago. And true the years we have followed our own lines and never looked on each other’s solutions. Most of the other brands who works with grounding had only few years on the neck. And that’s OK. They can have very good products even if they are new. We all must start somewhere and I´m sure it will end up in many good new solutions.
What makes me frustrated is when guys claim that they have tested products and give an impression of knowledge when they don’t.
Also, I´ve tried to change my profil so it shows I´m a manufacturer, but I can not find how to do.
Can someone please help me with that?
Hi P-O,
A great opportunity to have you here. I believe if you go to the top right hand of your screen, you click on your 'name/moniker 'P-O'' and then select Account Details: Signature. There you should be able to add a signature to your posts where you can indicate your professional affiliations.
A great opportunity to have you here. I believe if you go to the top right hand of your screen, you click on your 'name/moniker 'P-O'' and then select Account Details: Signature. There you should be able to add a signature to your posts where you can indicate your professional affiliations.
Obvious from your content that you were a manufacturer or dealer. Grounding boxes of all different makes can be used in the same system, but they don’t work “together” strictly speaking. You do not for example connect Tripoint and Entreq devices together or use both on the same component. It is also true if you look at all of the WBF and other forum commentary, reviews, and show reports that all of the “grounding” boxes - Tripoint, Entreq, CAD, Nordost Qkore, SGS, Russ Andrews, Puritan, etc. work to some extent to reduce noise. Except for Tripoint I haven’t seen any basis other than system synergy and individual tastes for preferring one brand over another. If you look at all of the commentary including posts on WBF, Tripoint appears to be in a different league than the others for most systems. This is what one would expect (hope) given the price differential.
Last edited:
