How DOES the grounding boxes work?

[plissken]

Based on the:

 

Instrumented data that I have seen

The lack of any human, bias controlled testing

 

They don't appear to work other than sighted. Ground means ground.

[plissken]

4 minutes ago, Cornan said:

 

I would'nt qualify that as a hard evidence against grounding boxes. Bias controlled testing! Common! 

Just tell me how you think they work. Not by accusing believers of being half deaf. ?

 

Based on the testing they can act as an antenna and introduce noise into a system.

[plissken]

Bottom line is maybe you prefer the added noise:

 

http://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/entreq-signal-grounding-preliminary-measurements.476/page-3#post-11656

[plissken]

1 minute ago, Cornan said:

 

What makes you think I beleive in that post compared to me own ears? Have you tried any grounding boxes yourself?

 

Again, I said you MAY PREFER THE ADDED NOISE.

[plissken]

55 minutes ago, Cornan said:

But I may NOT! ?

 

LOL.

 

The post said nothing subjectively about the ground box. It's showing what is happening if one is connected to audio equipment.

 

If you are hearing a difference and subjectively prefer it.... It MAY be the reason you prefer it.

 

 

[plissken]

This may be some A+ trolling folks

[plissken]

1 hour ago, Cornan said:

 So, anyone got an idea why grounding boxes might work? 

 Tin ears and gullibility for what ever comes along the pike?

 

My other attempt at a reasonable answer seemed to not work. You let me know what answer you would like and I will respond with that one.

[plissken]

2 hours ago, Cornan said:

I think the OP clearly indicates that I want to know why they WORK

 

They work by being an antenna, introducing a higher noise floor that you seem to have a preference for. You just aren't educated enough to know what it is you are hearing.

 

It's your preference and you a welcome to it.

[plissken]

11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

You sure seem confident in knowing what others are thinking. With such a mind reading ability, I'm surprised you're in the non-lucrative field of loudspeaker manufacturing. 

 

Seriously, you come off as being a jerk. Whether that is intentional or not, I have no idea. 

 

Chris, with respect. Multiple explanations, that have been ASKED for, have been given, and all dismissed.

 

So given that information AJ, and it's conclusion that I can't find fault with, has made another guess as to not how but WHY the listener thinks the box works.

 

Why does AJ need to be tea and cookies pleasant with someone that is ignoring so much data? He's not being unpleasant, just sometimes it takes a different tact.

 

You could also simply close the thread.

[plissken]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

It would be really nice to hear what Entreq has to say about this measurement. I'll try contacting them for the other side of the story. 

 

Could you ask them for a technical on why the box works and what measurements they use to support their claims?

[plissken]

I'm not aware of any other circuit where a single wire is connected with no return path and it's NOT an antenna.

 

If there is please let me know.

[plissken]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Hi plissken - Thanks for the reply. 

 

Nobody needs to be tea and cookies pleasant, but nobody should be a jerk. If you look at that comment, who is it really for? It's for AJ and nobody perhaps people who like him. It's not for the person asking questions. No minds are going to be changed or educated with a comment like that. 

 

I certainly hear you about talking with an Anti-Vaxer. I have one in my extended family. I used to provide facts and data to this person. I've now stopped talking about it with him/her. I have no duty to continue discussing the issue. Even after the measles outbreak here in Minnesota because of the crusade of an Anti-Vaxer, I didn't talk to this relative about it. 

 

I wish some people would take this approach. If talking to someone using what you know to be true, yields results that one doesn't agree with or similar, just stop talking to the person. 

 

I read several articles about the measles outbreak. Heartbreaking as I couldn't imagine putting my child through that.

 

But here is where our approaches diverge: The person that isn't reasonable, or in some sense of the word may not be totally sane in a narrow context, may need to hear the message, often, from others. Because it MAY click when someone else gives them basically the same information.

 

And yes we live in a society where some amount of shame or ridicule, hopefully, carefully measured out, as stick vs carrot.

 

AJ is not alone in pointing out these alternative explanations. What's left after sound data has been rejected? I don't think he's being a jerk, he's simply left with no other conclusion given the data.

[plissken]

41 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

And Chris pointed that out to the OP near the beginning of the thread.

 

And it's been ignored adding to the pool of data that starts pointing to delusion as a real reason.

Quote

 

You only need to be pleasant if you would like someone to listen to you.

 

I'm quite positive polite, technically sound points get equally ignored too.

 

Quote

The next time someone starts an explanation to you by making a point of letting you know you are deluded, wrong, and in need of a "crutch," please let me know how pleasant you feel the experience is (and also if this way of talking to you makes you more inclined to listen to what's being said).

 

Wouldn't be the first and surely won't be the last. However I'm capable of a well thought out position that generally has some research backing it up much to the chagrin of some members here.

 

If enough data is presented I'm of a mindset to listen as to not get to the point of being self deluded.

 

As a matter of fact I've been willing to PAY for my delusion about certain items making an audible difference to be corrected.

[plissken]

38 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

If you want to be scientific, there are studies about this.  Being confrontationally oppositional with individuals whose beliefs do not make sense has been shown in scientific studies to make them believe *even more strongly*.  So if you wish to be scientific about changing someone's mind, that is not the course to take.

 

I was scientific about it. The Entrec has been measured and posted about at WBF and AudioScienceReview.

 

You can't say I didn't give the reasoned, instrumented, approach first.

Exactly what is my responsibility to be 'nice' to someone that seemingly wants an answer, based in quackery, that isn't possible?

[plissken]

3 minutes ago, YashN said:

 

That's laughable: if this measurement is from Amir, he doesn't know how to make proper measurements from the Audio Precision gear with regards to grounding isolation.

 

Anyone taking this measurement from audiosciencemockery or Amir is a quack.

 

I'm willing to look at whatever debunking information you have. Links please.

[plissken]

2 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

@marceOK, if it's a box on the end of a wire connected to nothing other than the ground screw, I can't think of a way it would affect ground/leakage currents.

 

I'm concerned here Jud that you have been actively discussing a box that you didn't understand the construction of...

[plissken]

1 minute ago, Jud said:

 

No responsibility whatever.  It just depends whether you care if the OP wants to listen, which he's shown some willingness to do if people treat him with the courtesy he requested at the start of the thread.  But you can keep on telling him all he wants to hear is quackery if you feel that will do a better job (or if you don't care whether it does a better job and you're not really talking to the OP).

 

Lol. What on earth did Cornan post in this thread lead you to believe in him / her as a 'receptive' listener.

 

Sometimes information presented in these threads may be lost on the OP but serve as food for thought for others down the road.

 

Sometimes seeing the delusion of others will help see our own. I'm no exception to this.

[plissken]

2 minutes ago, YashN said:

 

Do your own work, pal.

 

Do some research instead of continuously propagating mis-measurements and misinformation by Amir, as if you know something about science or audiophile pursuits.

 

I don't need to convince you, I've done my own work.

 

Chris, is it possible for you to ban YashN from this thread?

[plissken]

1 minute ago, semente said:

 

One can educate without being scornful or putting down.

Be nice and make CA a better place; it's our responsibility.

 

We have a difference in opinion. I see my responses being tough, but I don't see them being unfair.

 

I think the hardest thing for Cornan to potentially have to come to grips with is that the grounding box may be adding noise to the system and it may be his preference. I know when I first showed him the measurements of the box that his reaction was visceral and very object to it.

 

That possibility would certainly erode away some who had built up themselves as some sort of connoisseur of audio to realize they have been listening to a noisy system and aligning it with an audiophile system.

 

[plissken]

14 minutes ago, elcorso said:

so willing to attack someone who puts a new thread that seems wrong to them because or the laws of Physic. By this way very few people are going to dare to pose new threads.

 

 

He's not being attacked. He is being taken to task for:

 

1. Asking for possible answers

2. Eschewing answers that don't align with what I believe is an unformed, still preconceived notion as how it does work.

 

You can't dismiss the answers if one didn't already have some form of answer in mind.

[plissken]

1 minute ago, elcorso said:

Sending somebody to school is not a nice suggestion, over here is considered an insult.

 

Roch

 

Where do you go from there? I once suggested to my struggling older brother that he may want to consider an extended education. You would have thought I asked him to join a monastery. 

[plissken]

3 minutes ago, elcorso said:

 

Different languages, different interpretations.

 

In Spanish (my language) "andá a estudiar" (go to school and learn) it could be translated to English "you are an stupid and needs to study".

 

Roch

 

I'm ignorant about a lot of things. If it's something that concerns me I attempt to correct my ignorance with what would be considered best practices.

 

Stupidity on the other hand is ignorance willfully left uncorrected.

[plissken]

5 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

So you were unsuccessful there, and took from this the lesson that you should repeat the same procedure and expect a different result?

 

So you mean since the suggestion didn't work for my brother that the same message:

 

1. Doesn't work for others

2. Won't work for my brother if his other lazy efforts don't work or he hears the same message from someone else.

 

Got it.

[plissken]

33 minutes ago, Cornan said:

 

I just commented what I quoted. I also liked the first part of the answer. I know ground currents need to return to the source. That is also what puzzles me when it comes to grounding boxes. IME they clearly enhance something. I am dying to find out what they do enhance rather than what it does'nt enhance and cannot do according to the laws of physics. It could as well be a double edged sword, where it just enhance more than it doesn't. The final result is for sure an improvement.  

 

You are a horse that has asked to be led to water. You are now staring at a clear, drinkable pool of it.

 

We know, demonstrably, what the box IS indeed capable of in Amir's measurements. You simply may have a preference for the added broad spectrum noise.

[plissken]

2 minutes ago, Cornan said:

So far the only straw you've showed up is your antenna idea.

 

Here is the thing: It is not an 'idea'. It's by very definition an Antenna. Honestly I think you are trolling but the thread can serve some good when others look.