• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

CAD grounding box, eliminating 'noise'

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
142
Location
Australia
#61
Frank, how the hell do cartridges putting out less than one millivolt ever get heard by us without being awash in noise.....dude, noise modulation begs that as the gain increases the noise increases and rides up and down with your signal, well, so what if that actually happened, you cant hear it, it will not even move your speaker cone, it will be burned up in your damn crossover. Get some facts and not just "belief" Find and show this noise modulation audibility you keep jabbering on about Sir. Edumucate us cretins on this horrible audible issue, if you can. Listen to her in the song, she asks if you can...
Tom, you're in a "mood" ;) :D - I'll wait till everyone stops bouncing up and down on their cushions, and some order is restored ...
 

tomelex

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
759
Likes
282
Location
So called Midwest, USA
#62
Tom, you're in a "mood" ;) :D - I'll wait till everyone stops bouncing up and down on their cushions, and some order is restored ...
I will wait for you Frank, I will wait for you, if I can, hahahaha Suggestion: Start a new thread entitled NOISE MODULATION FACTS, if you can, if you can.:D
 

tomelex

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
759
Likes
282
Location
So called Midwest, USA
#63
Here's a somewhat related discussion from someone who seems to have a clue:

https://interferencetechnology.com/...-ground-has-no-effect-on-emi-explain-further/

Cherry-picked quote to get you all excited:

"Given that all currents flow in closed loops, there can never be any such thing as a “noise sink”, so the common idea that noise can be “shunted away into the safety ground” is just plain wrong and always has been."
should be required reading for all here, highly recommended.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
142
Location
Australia
#64
If NOISE MODULATION FACTS were so clearly observable, so obvious, so easily measured then this would have been analysed and discussed to death, sorted out decades ago ... I start off with observations - I do something to a system and the sound changes - was the change an improvement or a degradation - if an improvement then the integrity of the system has been enhanced. So far, noise interference factors have been the killer problem, as in that is the main culprit which separates a poundingly loud hifi rig from a realistic, convincing replay of a captured musical event. I prefer the latter, and so work to reduce the impact of noise anyway I can - understanding how precisely the integrity of the signal is damaged doesn't have to be part of the process ... I don't need to understand the finer points of aerodynamics to be confident that a plane I board will be able to get off the ground ...
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
142
Location
Australia
#65
Here's a somewhat related discussion from someone who seems to have a clue:

https://interferencetechnology.com/...-ground-has-no-effect-on-emi-explain-further/

Cherry-picked quote to get you all excited:

"Given that all currents flow in closed loops, there can never be any such thing as a “noise sink”, so the common idea that noise can be “shunted away into the safety ground” is just plain wrong and always has been."
All currents? So, lightning, which has a solid lot of amps in the mix somehow cleverly works out how to get back up in the cloud, without us seeing how it's done?
 

Ken Newton

Active Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
190
Likes
40
#66
All currents? So, lightning, which has a solid lot of amps in the mix somehow cleverly works out how to get back up in the cloud, without us seeing how it's done?
Lightning does present an interesting case. Here's an analogy that may help to picture what essentially takes place. Imagine that you have a capacitor of some arbitrary voltage limit. Now, imagine charging that capacitor to above that limit. The dielectric (the insulation seperating the capacitor's plates) breakes down and the high voltage discharges as a current spike flowing between the plates.

In building to a lightening discharge, the clouds and the earth essentially act as conductive plates, while the air acts as a dielectric. An high voltage capacitor is thereby formed. During a storm, a voltage differential builds between the clouds and the earth until the differential becomes so great it breaks down the air dielectric - just like the voltage breakdown of that imaginary capacitor above. A high current spike flows between the clouds and the earth. A lighting strike has occured.

The current flow is the same as it would be for any voltage source, from one pole to it's relative opposite pole. In this case, between the clouds and the earth. Lighting strikes are deceiving because the poles are spread so far apart, seperated by many feet of air, we don't readily recognize the macro scale capacitor that's been formed.
 
Last edited:

Thomas savage

Power hungry desperado
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
7,441
Likes
5,954
Location
uk, taunton
#67
Well, there is a problem here. Take this fish scale:



You hold the one end and put the hook into the fish, lift the whole thing and measure the weight. It works on the principle of the top of the spring being stationary and bottom connected to the weight.

Now, what if I asked you to measure the weight using that but that you can only use the hook end. Will you be able to measure the weight? Answer is no of course.

Same problem here. These devices have only one terminal. Measurement devices have two. Where do you connect the other wire in the instrument? Dangle it in the air? Some other earth reference? If so, why?

This is the same issue I had with analyzing Entreq. There is only one example of a one-wire device and that is an antenna. But the moment we go there analyzing such a device as an antenna, then the whole argument is lost as an antenna will pick up noise, not suppress it.

This is why I measure the output of the DAC. The DAC has two wires and we can measure what comes out of it electrically with and without the "grounding" device.
Always with the fish analogies ...,

IMG_0791.JPG
 

Speedskater

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2016
Messages
323
Likes
179
Location
Cleveland, Ohio USA
#68
Nothing? As in meaning a low value? - at 100 MHz, in the middle of the range where this device is aiming at, 100pF is about 16R reactance - that's a nice low impedance conduction path to the "earth".
At 100 MHz the wire connecting the magic box to the hi-fi system is a great antenna! (Who said that the box was 100pF anyway?)
RFI like this needs to be dealt with at the hi-fi component chassis. In power line circuits (or audio circuits, for that mater) it's easy to Low Pass filter RFI like this.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
142
Location
Australia
#69
At 100 MHz the wire connecting the magic box to the hi-fi system is a great antenna! (Who said that the box was 100pF anyway?)
RFI like this needs to be dealt with at the hi-fi component chassis. In power line circuits (or audio circuits, for that mater) it's easy to Low Pass filter RFI like this.
Yes, the antenna issue needs to be considered - if someone was setting up such a contraption to use this principle then they would obviously try for maximum self capacitance - which stops it being an antenna ?? - better than a human, at least.

I agree that RFI really needs to be stopped at the component level, by shielding and filtering. But typical audio cases have holes as big as the mouth of a cave as far as RFI is concerned - if this is going to be done and have any effectiveness then the design has to be rigorously engineered; a few bits and pieces of protection thrown in will almost useless.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
142
Location
Australia
#70
One of the signs that someone is attempting to sell you snake-oil is when any rational explanation of the functioning of a product is absent. While the efficacy, or the significance of some benefit may be debatable, an rational explanation for that benefit should not be absent.
Just noted a number of people liking this post, and would have to say I disagree. The whole medical industry has depended over a majority of its existence to a very large component of "I don't how it does, but it appears to work!" "product". If someone determines that a new compound is efficacious in helping some medical condition do they then spend large amounts of money working out, why ? Or do they madly try and get results showing it's genuinely useful, and doesn't kill anyone - and then push it like crazy on the market, to make pots of money?

If something works, it works - the "whys" may be hard to determine, and ascribed to the wrong mechanism on the way - waiting for the real reasons to be fully exposed, before using something, is just downright silly ...
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
22,146
Likes
32,464
Location
Seattle Area
#71
The whole medical industry has depended over a majority of its existence to a very large component of "I don't how it does, but it appears to work!" "product". If someone determines that a new compound is efficacious in helping some medical condition do they then spend large amounts of money working out, why ? Or do they madly try and get results showing it's genuinely useful, and doesn't kill anyone - and then push it like crazy on the market, to make pots of money?

If something works, it works - the "whys" may be hard to determine, and ascribed to the wrong mechanism on the way - waiting for the real reasons to be fully exposed, before using something, is just downright silly ...
If something "works" as in changes the soundwaves hearing your ears, that would be fine here. Problem is that folks use a lot more than the soundwaves to make that determination so we don't know or better put, know very well that it didn't work.
 

fas42

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
2,818
Likes
142
Location
Australia
#72
If something "works" as in changes the soundwaves hearing your ears, that would be fine here. Problem is that folks use a lot more than the soundwaves to make that determination so we don't know or better put, know very well that it didn't work.
Meaning that people who connected this device to their equipment and heard a, positive, difference are all lying?
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
22,146
Likes
32,464
Location
Seattle Area
#74
Meaning that people who connected this device to their equipment and heard a, positive, difference are all lying?
Lying assumes a conscious choice. This one is not. They simply are not familiar with human perception and how all of our other senses and brain routinely override what the ear is hearing.

In other words, they state what they perceive. But what they perceive in vast majority of cases has nothing to do with what went into their ears. Numerous studies demonstrate this. It is for this reason that listening tests go through the huge trouble and aggravation of blind listening.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
22,146
Likes
32,464
Location
Seattle Area
#75
This is the other factor: they rather be wrong and happy, than right and unhappy! :) A beautiful cable or grounding box at high cost is a delusion that is valuable in itself. Accepting that the device does nothing or their hearing evaluation is wrong, brings unhappiness.
 

FrantzM

Major Contributor
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
1,200
Likes
1,114
#76
This is the other factor: they rather be wrong and happy, than right and unhappy! :) A beautiful cable or grounding box at high cost is a delusion that is valuable in itself. Accepting that the device does nothing or their hearing evaluation is wrong, brings unhappiness.
Right you are... FOr many audiophiles their super-accurate hearing is an object of barely hidden pride. On top of that there is a real sense of being special when one manages to bring one's system to a level where said system allows anyone, even the untrained or the non-interested to hear the clear difference a change in grounding box brings to an already great system ... Of course the more money dropped in the system the better it becomes continuously ... No mistake is ever made .. Every new products widens, deepens and blackens the soundstage ... It is days and night even more at each iteration and disbursements .... yet such results remain unmeasurable.

What is even more potent for those who manage to sell those wares is the line of defense mounted by those possessing system of "sufficient" resolution :rolleyes:... Any questioning is met with contempt and fierce resistance... That the manufacturers used lies and falsities is OK once the SQ is deemed better ... Any attempts to even suggest a methodology that would test the "night and day" differences is shot down quickly

Looking at this from a certain distance one can understand or be astonished by how easily people can be fooled or sometimes want to be...
 

Thomas savage

Power hungry desperado
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
7,441
Likes
5,954
Location
uk, taunton
#77
@fas42

Your subjective expirence is faulty / unreliable at best, the subsequent conclusions and then convictions you have formed only hold true in your imagination Frank . You seem to of determined a reality in science that is solely maintained by your fanciful wim of thought..

Good luck believing your whimsical theory's dreamt up on the spot trump the research based evidence collected over decades by qualified scientists and audio engineers.

Knowledge does tend to start in our imagination as a theory though, you just lack the resources and background in science to test them properly and have got very high on the conclusions you have drawn.

Keep the imagination for thinking up questions , to challenge science and stop using it as a base for knowns at least while your here at ASR.

( moderator action)
Multiple posts deleted, wanting to put this thread back in the main forum Iv deleted a good few posts. @fas42 if you want to argue against science and known understanding with nothing more than your imaginings please stick to the thread in fight club I created for precisely this purpose.. you are now prohibited from replying in this thread.

Thanks for your understanding.
 

Similar threads

Top Bottom