Did you try connecting the chassis directly to the Everest poles, comparing it with the connection to Altaira Chasis Ground? I'd be very interested in that comparison.
I'm currently attaching 4 device chassis to Everest poles with cheap generic cables. I have been waiting for an order for 4 Shunyata Alfa ground cables for THREE MONTHS. Sometimes I think that if I served my clients with this speed, the most I could hope for is listening to music on a Sanyo Radio-Cassette.
My current grounding solution is just that - all components' chassis-earth connected in star-topology to Everest' CGS plinth.
I started with home-made cheap-shit cables - that gave an improvement.
I then switched to better, low-impedence cables (still in star-topology) - that made big SQ improvement -> cable-impedence is important at the frequencies of the ground-noise.
In our test - we started with chassis-ground only, then added signal-grounding.
We also tried removing the chassis-ground (as the biggest incremental SQ uptick was related to signal-ground) - but it was clear that chassis-ground also played a part in the overall SQ effect ->
both hubs needed (IN THAT SYSTEM AT LEAST).
Sorry - we did not test using chassis-ground only with Everest CGS - but I will try that when I get the evaluation kit (as this is my current state).
As far as I can tell there are two differences:
A) Altaira Chassis has a built-in filter (I do not think Everest has that for the CGS-plinths - it is not mentioned by Shunyata at least
B) Altaira Chassis has six separate channels (preventing component-to-component ground leaks) - Everest has four CGS plinths but these are interconnected.
So, from engineering perspective Altaira Chassis should be the better solution.
I will let you know after testing it it is worth it or if - Everest CGS - Chassis + Altaira Signal is the price-effective solution (for my system)
The wait for Shunyata deliveries is frustrating, product quality is good though. (The Altaira was supposed to hit the market +1y ago.)