• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

John Swenson Shield Ground (JSSG), a myth debunked

KSTR

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
2,772
Likes
6,203
Location
Berlin, Germany
For about several years we see the topic pop up here and there in various forums, and today, besides the usual DIY approach, we even have some cable manufacturers that offer this additional screening method for various cables.

John Swenson Shield Ground (JSSG) looks like this:
1580982640886.png

A second shield sleeve is put on the existing cable and the shield ends are connected together with a separate isolated wire running alongside the shield. The idea and the claim is that the loop wire is "shorting out" any noise signal on the added shield, making it highly effective to reduce pickup of magnetic field (developing common-mode voltage differentials) by the inner cable, as well as likewise reduced emission.

Trained EE's will already have developed goosebumps of anger just by this....

To my knowledge, as of yet no measurements, at least at a semiprofessional level, that show this really does work (or how it is supposed to work) have been published. Also, of course no blind testing of the acoustic effect has ever been attempted (and most likely will never happen).

I took the time to do some relevant measurements as well doing some thinking how this might work (or, better said, why it doesn't) and wrote a little paper on that, see attachment.

As expected, the whole thing turned out as a complete hoax (and sure doesn't help Mr. Swenson's reputation, being "chief engineer" at UpTone Audio) whereas conventional physics and electric engineering have been shown to be correct, once again. That won't convince the believers ("if it does't show anything, you've measured the wrong thing, your approach and setup are not adequate to the task", etc, etc, blah, blah).

We'll get over it, and I hope my paper helps improve the understanding of those interested in this kind of topics, with a sane level of scepticism.
 

Attachments

  • JohnSwensonShieldGround-MeasurementOfShieldingEffectiveness.pdf
    1.8 MB · Views: 3,501

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
16,051
Likes
36,427
Location
The Neitherlands
When one is using a dual RCA cable aren't the shields in parallel anyway via the connected equipment and does basically the same 'nothing' as the JSSGN ? (the N stands for Nonsense in the abbreviation)

And indeed one cannot measure 'magic' so the myth will haunt the interweb audiophile forums for ages to come.
 

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,685
Likes
10,705
Location
Hampshire
The idea and the claim is that the loop wire is "shorting out" any noise signal on the added shield,
Anyone with a basic knowledge of electromagnetism should see that this is utter nonsense. As you point out, the same voltage will be induced in the wire as in the shield, so it may as well not be there.

What I can't figure out is why he promotes this idea. Does he truly believe he's a genius, or does he merely want people to think he is? Regardless of the answer, this claim alone completely discredits him as an engineer.
 
OP
KSTR

KSTR

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
2,772
Likes
6,203
Location
Berlin, Germany
He writes in his bio (scroll down about half way): "In order to finance all this I work for a semiconductor company laying out large complex chips, with a specialty in internal power networks and how what is going on inside the chip disturbs its own power delivery network in the chip, the package and board."
So, a claimed signal integrity / EMC expert who sure is familiar with the known state of the art as published by Ott et al.
Must be a severly split personality...
Then again, even the most sincere EE may vent a brain fart from time to time, things happen. Maybe he now actually has withdrawn withdrawn this weird idea but failed to communicate so, and the whole thing developed its own momunentum, fake news for people living in their bubble sort of thing...
 

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,685
Likes
10,705
Location
Hampshire
He writes in his bio (scroll down about half way): "In order to finance all this I work for a semiconductor company laying out large complex chips, with a specialty in internal power networks and how what is going on inside the chip disturbs its own power delivery network in the chip, the package and board."
So, a claimed signal integrity / EMC expert who sure is familiar with the known state of the art as published by Ott et al.
We only have his word for that. Maybe his actual job isn't quite as advanced as he makes it out to be.

Then again, even the most sincere EE may vent a brain fart from time to time, things happen. Maybe he now actually has withdrawn withdrawn this weird idea but failed to communicate so, or the whole thing developed its own momunentum, fake news for people living in their bubble sort of thing...
He has made the claim repeatedly over a period of years. I don't think it's a simple brain fart, which I agree we all suffer occasionally. At the very least, he should have tested it before doubling down on the idea. Then again, we know he's not too keen on making (relevant) measurements.
 

jtwrace

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
1,227
Likes
1,410
Location
Orlando, FL
What I can't figure out is why he promotes this idea. Does he truly believe he's a genius, or does he merely want people to think he is? .
It fills his pockets with money, that's why. It's obvious that company is about the moolah and not science. If it was; they would actually show science that is peer reviewed and hold patents. There is certainly enough money to do that.
 

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,685
Likes
10,705
Location
Hampshire
It fills his pockets with money, that's why. It's obvious that company is about the moolah and not science. If it was; they would actually show science that is peer reviewed and hold patents. There is certainly enough money to do that.
He doesn't seem to be selling cables, though. If money is the goal, the idea must be reinforce his personal cult in order to sell more of other things. It could also be that he really believes himself to be the second coming of our lord (Maxwell). Profit or prophet, that is the question.
 

jtwrace

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
1,227
Likes
1,410
Location
Orlando, FL
He doesn't seem to be selling cables, though. If money is the goal, the idea must be reinforce his personal cult in order to sell more of other things. It could also be that he really believes himself to be the second coming of our lord (Maxwell). Profit or prophet, that is the question.
Yes, I do believe that he and his partner believe their own "magic". So well that others follow...
 

cjm2077

Active Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Messages
160
Likes
261
For about several years we see the topic pop up here and there in various forums, and today, besides the usual DIY approach, we even have some cable manufacturers that offer this additional screening method for various cables.

John Swenson Shield Ground (JSSG) looks like this:
View attachment 48825
A second shield sleeve is put on the existing cable and the shield ends are connected together with a separate isolated wire running alongside the shield. The idea and the claim is that the loop wire is "shorting out" any noise signal on the added shield, making it highly effective to reduce pickup of magnetic field (developing common-mode voltage differentials) by the inner cable, as well as likewise reduced emission.

Trained EE's will already have developed goosebumps of anger just by this....

To my knowledge, as of yet no measurements, at least at a semiprofessional level, that show this really does work (or how it is supposed to work) have been published. Also, of course no blind testing of the acoustic effect has ever been attempted (and most likely will never happen).

I took the time to do some relevant measurements as well doing some thinking how this might work (or, better said, why it doesn't) and wrote a little paper on that, see attachment.

As expected, the whole thing turned out as a complete hoax (and sure doesn't help Mr. Swenson's reputation, being "chief engineer" at UpTone Audio) whereas conventional physics and electric engineering have been shown to be correct, once again. That won't convince the believers ("if it does't show anything, you've measured the wrong thing, your approach and setup are not adequate to the task", etc, etc, blah, blah).

We'll get over it, and I hope my paper helps improve the understanding of those interested in this kind of topics, with a sane level of scepticism.

A shield that isn't connected to anything is not a shield. It's just an antenna sitting in a field. Just like the wire inside it.
 
Top Bottom