• 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). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Chord GroundARAY Review (Noise Filter?)

Rate this audio product:

  • 1. Waste of money (piggy bank panther)

    Votes: 243 97.2%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 5 2.0%

  • Total voters
    250

Inner Space

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,078
Likes
2,309
If ten different people say there are, they hear, differences, as a scientist, you'd ask why is that!?!?
This is a foundational point, but it doesn't lead where you want it to lead. I had two eminent pure scientists in my family, so I know the mindset intimately. If the same sound was heard ten different ways, you bet they would ask why. They would be genuinely excited for a second, and then, instinctively, they would start a mental checklist: can an experiment be designed? What else would I be missing by doing this? How much time and budget would it need?

Because if they choose to pursue it, their enthusiasm comes at a cost. Therefore, again instinctively, their first operational thought is, "I better check the basic proposition is, you know, actually true, so we need to blind test these ten people, maybe alongside fifty or a hundred others, representative of the population. If everything looks solid and repeatable, we'll set something up."

Therefore, a point you feel attacks ASR's method actually supports it. There are members here who have designed amazing, landmark technology. There are others who will, one day - if only they could find a fruitful avenue of inquiry. They would love it with an intensity you can't imagine if something new came up. But so far, nothing has survived contact with that first operational question: is the basic proposition actually true?
 

Katji

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
2,997
Likes
2,195
Location
Mzansi
View attachment 222559

KzaP.gif



JSmith


Same person does it every time. It amuses him. In some instances it's almost obvious.
 

beagleman

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
668
Likes
802
I'm no engineer, but according to the logic I wonder: why shall I spend 800$/€ for a device that doesn't improve the same thing done by a 300$/€ DAC?
Whether you put it before, after, above, below it doesn't provide any measurable improvement to the final output.
If there's no better output that's a well deserved picking panther

If ten people say they hear improvements, opposite to the objective data measuring none, the real scientist will investigate what brings such a flaw to human aural preception, and the process so as ear/brain correct and cheats itself.
Saying they hear something is one thing.
Being able to reliably prove they can hear or identify it is quite another.

I can say I saw Bigfoot, but saying it hold next to no validity.
 

Koeitje

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
1,765
Likes
2,776
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.
True, and that's why scientists already asked themselves such questions. They figured out why people hear differences when dealing with audio even when there aren't any and now they know they have to put in strict controls when you ask people to evaluate something.
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,104
Likes
5,099
Just don't get how this isn't straight forward false advertising, or fraudulent entirely. Says it reduces noise, yet there is no noise reduction... Noise can be measured so there is ZERO way out of this as a subjectivist.
 

Jimster480

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
Messages
1,883
Likes
1,231
Location
Miami
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.
Sighted bias. There is science to show why this happens, because audio memory is poor and sighted bias is high. This is why most people couldn't tell devices apart in any blind A/B situations.... With very few guessing right at any time...
The science conducted here is repeatable with repeatable results. That is how it is supposed to work.
When 5 people say they hear a difference
Would the parts cost even reach $1?
Probably wouldn't.
Nothing. We know this because we have some understanding about how digital audio /network works.

The DAC was not influenced by the "noise" from the network or there was no "noise" or the test was not Abel to resolve it.
So if the claim is it "filters noise" this was not tested.
But we still know it’s not.
Yea it is hard to even check on "network noise" I mean it is a whole different industry but this product is being sold in the audio industry.
If snake-oil works, is it still snake-oil ?
That is a question! :confused:

View attachment 222547
It is because so many peoples problems are all in their head. Many people have high blood pressure from worrying too much, then they find out they have high blood pressure and worry about having high blood pressure. So then they take something and they stop worrying about it because now it is taken care of and as such the problem is indeed taken care of simply because they aren't worrying.
However this doesn't mean that the sugar pill actually lowers their blood pressure, their nerves are.
 

sofrep811

Active Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
166
Likes
222
You don't really have a clue, do you?
Please enlighten me since your seem to be the MENSA in the room. I have no idea who you are but you seem to know me well as to make such a solid judgement on myself.
 
Last edited:

CapMan

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2022
Messages
128
Likes
226
The Chord Company is NOT Chord Electronics in any shape or form. The Chord Company started out making interconnects for Naim amplifiers back in the early 80's which were all DIN socketed. The range expanded into the lower reaches of the foo-end of the market and they've got into these potentially lucrative products too.
Their cables (speaker and interconnect) seem to be carried by many dealers here in the UK.

There marketing blurb on the Chord Epic speaker cable says they are particularly suitable for floorstanders - enough said I think.

“It’s particularly good at bringing control and definition across the bass frequencies and is the ideal cable solution for floor-standing speakers.”
 

KSTR

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
2,137
Likes
4,706
Location
Berlin, Germany
I would think internally these "filters" are crude shunt dissipators, trying to convert RF present on the signal pins (vs ground and/or shell pins) of the specific connector to heat.
That behavior could be measured with an RF network analyzer and I would expect to see some effect.

However, it would take an extraordinarily bad audio device design that this could make any difference for the actual audio output, but it is not entirely impossible.

I would file these gimmick products under "highlights of unregulated capitalism" ;-)
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
38,577
Likes
168,151
Location
Seattle Area
I would think internally these "filters" are crude shunt dissipators, trying to convert RF present on the signal pins (vs ground and/or shell pins) of the specific connector to heat.
They are not though. They are a single wire going into some material. No circuit is completed. This is why they call them "grounding" devices. They only connect to ground even though the connector has both signal connections (for mechanical compatibility).
 

DSJR

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 27, 2020
Messages
1,710
Likes
2,145
Location
Suffolk Coastal, UK
Their cables (speaker and interconnect) seem to be carried by many dealers here in the UK.

There marketing blurb on the Chord Epic speaker cable says they are particularly suitable for floorstanders - enough said I think.

“It’s particularly good at bringing control and definition across the bass frequencies and is the ideal cable solution for floor-standing speakers.”
Speaker cables came later and I sold plenty of it at the time. A lesson I learned (re-learned) far too late - forget foo materials, silver plating and PTFE insulation (which I gather is needed not for sound quality, but to make the cabe itself?), it's the GAUGE which is most important really - this latter fact was screaming at me when I used the Linn k10 speaker cable (free with the one-box 'Classik' music system) which is basically a generic good quality fig-8 type (2.5mm?) and which 'sounded' great in a more expensive system when I tried it out 'for a giggle.' Sorry, twenty years away from it as a full time job tends to re-focus on what's important apart from making money.....
 
Top Bottom