Chord GroundARAY Review (Noise Filter?)

[Lambda]

Value?

it's a short extension cable...

 

[respice finem]

it's a short extension cable...

Probably too short / too stiff to be of any real use?

 

[soundcheck]

Dear Amir.

You did it again. (I've seen your quite similar verdicts on USB filters)

If you measure and qualify noise filters, please measure the noise reduction and potential impact right after the filter.
If you measure the DAC output you simply can't judge the filter performance alone.
You'd judge the DAC AND the filter combined. And today's DACs do filter a lot on their own.
Beside that noise sources, ground loops etc. can impact an entire system. Not just the DAC.

You'd better be careful slating a product based on IMO inadequate tests. That I'd consider pretty unprofessional
and "NON-SCIENTIFIC". (I am an engineer myself btw.)

Your listening tests, as subjective as they are, add nothing to the whole subject. Let alone all the "audiophile" bashing.
You know best that the manufacturer of your measurement equipment clearly admitted and explained the limitations
of its results (Youtube video and you being present!) when it comes to the audible performance of a system.

And using tools like that DeltaWave also measures after the DAC. It also simply won't help to measure and review
a filter alone.


I do appreciate all your measurements - if done right.


SC

 

[respice finem]

Next step = "you've measured with the wrong noise"?
/scnr.

I wonder if someone had dismantled or X-rayed these...

 

[Jimster480]

View attachment 222519

Ouch, this was a hard read... And people fall for this.... It's not worth $0.99 although at $1 I'm sure lots of people would buy it just to see if helps with random pops or clicks or something.

Why would you buy dirty water in the first place? Cheap clean drinking water is commodity in most places…

… hope this comment will age well after a few more decades …

Me too, but I'm not taking any bets :/

Not saying it works.
But if you would test a water filter, would you test it with already perfectly clean water?

Well @amirm plugged into his busy switch and nothing happened. Would it have been better if he smashed his switch on the floor first? Or would it then be "unable to fix a broken switch"?
We just have to call a spade a spade with this one...
Ethernet doesn't even work that way so this couldn't do anything for a networked DAC. Now if it was a line filter.... It could maybe do something for noise in the unit or just protecting it from voltage spikes in the ethernet... Then it would atleast have a couple bucks value maybe.. But this isn't even an active line filter.

 

[Jimster480]

Dear Amir.

You did it again. (I've seen your quite similar verdicts on USB filters)

If you measure and qualify noise filters, please measure the noise reduction and potential impact right after the filter.
If you measure the DAC output you simply can't judge the filter performance alone.
You'd judge the DAC AND the filter combined. And today's DACs do filter a lot on their own.
Beside that noise sources, ground loops etc. can impact an entire system. Not just the DAC.

You'd better be careful slating a product based on IMO inadequate tests. That I'd consider pretty unprofessional
and "NON-SCIENTIFIC". (I am an engineer myself btw.)

Your listening tests, as subjective as they are, add nothing to the whole subject. Let alone all the "audiophile" bashing.
You know best that the manufacturer of your measurement equipment clearly admitted and explained the limitations
of its results (Youtube video and you being present!) when it comes to the audible performance of a system.

And using tools like that DeltaWave also measures after the DAC. It also simply won't help to measure and review
a filter alone.


I do appreciate all your measurements - if done right.


SC

You have to be kidding, right? This is being sold as an audio product to improve audio quality. Therefore he should actually measure the output straight from his headphones or his amp to see what wonderful changes it has made! Measuring straight from the DAC is being very generous to give this device the best case where it can do something.
Because you are right about something; DACs already have filtering and they don't need crap like this to function perfectly.

 

[Lambda]

Well @amirm plugged into his busy switch and nothing happened. Would it have been better if he smashed his switch on the floor first? Or would it then be "unable to fix a broken switch"?

To stay with the water filter analogy.

Fist you test if you can detect/resolve any trace amounts of contamination. If you have them and you can Measure them then you can add a filter to test if it improves it.

but if you don't have contamination or it's below what you can resolve you can't make meaningful test of the filter.
You can only say in this particular cases the filter is not needed.

 

[DanielT]

I think it's good that you are trying these products Amir. Consumer information.

It was expensive lipstick which did not produce any desired effect.

Real lipstick, on the other hand, can sometimes give the desired effect.

 

[DSJR]

I remember them too. If I recall correctly, Naim amps were sensitive to reactive speaker cables, it used to blow up the output stage, hence Chord making low-reactive cables for them.

Chord only made the interconnects, Naim introduced their own speaker cables.

 

[amirm]

it's a short extension cable...

It is not. It only has one connector. Nothing comes out of it.

 

[respice finem]

It is not. It only has one connector. Nothing comes out of it.

That's even more, erm, "unique" than I thougt then.

On the other hand, there are some single-ended noise mitigation solutions that actually work

Amazon.com

/scnr

 

[DSJR]

I don't recall that, nor NAIM amplifiers blowing up being an issue. Besides, NAIM was already selling their own cables when Chord started in mid 80s.

Julian was adamant not to use RCA connectors on his devices and that created a market for DIN to RCA interconnects. A relation to a NAIM employee (I think the wife but not sure, it has been a while) realised that the American NAIM dealers are ready to pay good money for such interconnects and started the company.

Naims back then were sensitive to speaker cables and sold themselves on their fussiness - we did have a few failures, but as we supplied the cables and most often installed the things, stability was largely guaranteed. Back then before the A4 speaker cables, 'we' made up RS50 or 56 strand instrument wires and twisted them together. Until 1982 or '83, we used off the peg DIN to RCA cables for tape decks and so on which were quite adequate but not posh enough looking. Chord used a four (tiny) core RS cable with outer screen as the base for their Chrysalis and original Cobra interconnects and fitted nice looking plugs on, the DIN's being lockable as per Naim's wont. the Chrysalis RCAs had one of the cores plus screen and the original Cobra had two of the cores and the screen initially. In the 90's they began to expand the range upwards and then when Nordost stopped supplying the Flatline speaker wire to them, the Rumour thin silver plated PTFE covered stuff appeared, followed by the thicker but still not generous gauge Odyssey. By this time, Naims output stage wasn't so frail and that trend continues today, some smaller Naims even having output inductors fitted!

Chord Co founder Sally was the wife of Naim's Paul Stevenson but not sure when they parted. They were certainly together in 1982 when I first met them at Linn in Glasgow.

As for JV not wanting RCA's, I'd suggest a lot of the decision was commercial and exclusivity in all honesty - even Quad began to use RCA's around this time. Same with Naim using BNC's on the phono input, this on a heavily band limited amp system, rolling off over 40kHz or so from memory. Made it more difficult to compare with other amps if vinyl was the main source as it was in the sheeple dealers back then (I was one, so hold my hand up).

 

[soundcheck]

You have to be kidding, right? This is being sold as an audio product to improve audio quality. Therefore he should actually measure the output straight from his headphones or his amp to see what wonderful changes it has made! Measuring straight from the DAC is being very generous to give this device the best case where it can do something.
Because you are right about something; DACs already have filtering and they don't need crap like this to function perfectly.

I am actually pretty serious about that.

Amir and this site implies a "scientific" approach. It's not. What's being offered are basic measurements.
Empirical evidence gets neglected. As well as e.g. Audio Precision statements about its equipment limitations.
And as mentioned, there are procedural flaws.

Since years Amir generates measurements of audio devices, DACs in particular, showing flaws beyond
audible thresholds. If you'd follow Amirs (and his followers) logic: "all DuTs therefore sound the same",
it would basically imply there'd be no reason for having this forum at all anymore.

Yet. That's simply not the case. The devices do not sound the same. People keep buying new stuff.

All I am saying. You better be careful not to drift into an ideological direction.

If ten different people say there are, they hear, differences, as a scientist, you'd ask why is that!?!?
Even if one out of hundred says he experienced a difference it shouldn't be neglected. That's what science is all about.
Otherwise we'd still living in caves.

And you bet. Amir is well aware of it!

Enjoy.

 

[DSJR]

I don't have the time to watch this and waste 10 mins of life, but so far it's the usual claptrap... jitter is mentioned etc.;

JSmith

Is this the same Alan Gibb - aka one half of 'The Toothpaste Twins' (with Michael McClean) of the 1980's? He used to be quite a knowledgeable chap around the Linn-Naim accessories axis and I knew him when he was at Linn many years back.

All this elderly audiophool (so gradually going deaf due to age) back slapping is getting me down, frankly.

 

[voodooless]

If ten different people say there are, they hear, differences, as a scientist, you'd ask why is that!?!?

Billions of people believe there is a God, and it’s not even the same one for all. That doesn’t mean any of them are real. Lot’s of people also think homeopathy works…

Al they need to do is provide incontrovertible proof.. same applies here. Where is a single shred of proof that these things do anything?

Even if one out of hundred says he experienced a difference it shouldn't be neglected.

Why not? People claim all kinds of nonsense all the time. They can come with proof, and then we can have a discussion. If it’s all so clear, that should be a simple thing to do.

 

[DSJR]

Dear Amir.

You did it again. (I've seen your quite similar verdicts on USB filters)

If you measure and qualify noise filters, please measure the noise reduction and potential impact right after the filter.
If you measure the DAC output you simply can't judge the filter performance alone.
You'd judge the DAC AND the filter combined. And today's DACs do filter a lot on their own.
Beside that noise sources, ground loops etc. can impact an entire system. Not just the DAC.

You'd better be careful slating a product based on IMO inadequate tests. That I'd consider pretty unprofessional
and "NON-SCIENTIFIC". (I am an engineer myself btw.)

Your listening tests, as subjective as they are, add nothing to the whole subject. Let alone all the "audiophile" bashing.
You know best that the manufacturer of your measurement equipment clearly admitted and explained the limitations
of its results (Youtube video and you being present!) when it comes to the audible performance of a system.

And using tools like that DeltaWave also measures after the DAC. It also simply won't help to measure and review
a filter alone.


I do appreciate all your measurements - if done right.


SC

Really, instead of verbal puff, Chord Co should post measurements they've done which could be repeated by third parties, showing graphically where the 'improvements' actually are.

Dealers need to make a living in these hard times and are easily prey to 'profitable ideas' to enthusiastically pass on to their gullible customers, many of whom lap it up.

 

[respice finem]

Billions of people believe there is a God, and it’s not even the same one for all. That doesn’t mean any of them are real. Lot’s of people also think homeopathy works…

Al they need to do is provide incontrovertible proof.. same applies here. Where is a single shred of proof that these things do anything?

Why not? People claim all kinds of nonsense all the time. They can come with proof, and then we can have a discussion. If it’s all so clear, that should be a simple thing to do.

That's why the "tale tellers" shun measurements "as the devil holy water": Like you can scientiffically neither disprove or prove God, you cannot tell what another person hears (or what his brain produces). But, claims based on defined measurements can be verified or busted.

 

[composer]

I guess that if we knew that ARAY is an acronym standing for something in pompous Latin, it would sound better to our ears.
We don't know yet, so we should all suspend our judgement

 

[nyxnyxnyx]

I am actually pretty serious about that.

Amir and this site implies a "scientific" approach. It's not. What's being offered are basic measurements.
Empirical evidence gets neglected. As well as e.g. Audio Precision statements about its equipment limitations.
And as mentioned, there are procedural flaws.

Since years Amir generates measurements of audio devices, DACs in particular, showing flaws beyond
audible thresholds. If you'd follow Amirs (and his followers) logic: "all DuTs therefore sound the same",
it would basically imply there'd be no reason for having this forum at all anymore.

Yet. That's simply not the case. The devices do not sound the same. People keep buying new stuff.

All I am saying. You better be careful not to drift into an ideological direction.

If ten different people say there are, they hear, differences, as a scientist, you'd ask why is that!?!?
Even if one out of hundred says he experienced a difference it shouldn't be neglected. That's what science is all about.
Otherwise we'd still living in caves.

And you bet. Amir is well aware of it!

Enjoy.

I think your criticism is written in a constructive manner, but I don't get it. If you feel like Amir (or anyone else) did measure incorrectly, do you have any clearer solutions to suggest, especially since you claim to be an engineer (in what field, I don't know yet).

A big, valid part of the endless debate about devices like this groundARRAY is that:
1) those companies never show any proofs/evidences of their marketing claims (either in form of measurements, recorded blinded tests, or other sets of reasonable data)
2) when including measurements done by people within the community (ASR, crinacle, headphones show etc...) those kind of devices almost never make a difference big enough within our audible threshold (noise floor level, frequency range, IMD...)


I can still list more but IMO the 1) factor is most concerning. I don't really mind if some guy measured incorrectly, the thing is time after time those brands never made any counter-argument with evidences of their "researches". They often tend to dismiss the disadvantageous measurements and testaments and simply say shit like "well your ears aren't well trained enough to hear it" or "your gears aren't good enough to hear it".
Think about it, if a company made a device that claims to reduce jitter better than any other devices, shouldn't they (the company) HAVE TO confirm that result in some way that's not just casual listening tests?

 

[Caliban]

This is what I think of when I see ARAY
It is the old Soviet Duga radar array in Ukraine, really cool.