DIY Ground Box Thread

[cdacosta]

Thank you, @cdacosta. I ordered a pair to try it with my DAC.

I will order for the behemoth grounding box after it arrives, in case you make new discoveries, and have other recommendations for it at that time.

Keep this in mind. The break-in for that cable is long with wild swings. Has been discussed at length in the beginning of the Aliexpress thread. For the money stock it is a very good sounding cable. After the mod and attaching to a ground box, the cable is a totally different beast.

 

[Dandoudou]

Keep this in mind. The break-in for that cable is long with wild swings.

Yes, Silver cables are long to break-in.

 

[cdacosta]

My DIY Ground box updated from original recipe...

* When using a binding post, for best result sonically use pure copper binding posts.

* And for the internal wiring with binding posts, 3 legs of the 14ga. 6N copper OCC Single Crystal stranded wire. This will give a total AWG of 9ga. And 10" in length for each leg, this gives really good mineral coverage when all the strands are separated. If direct wiring, instead of stripping 7", go 10".

* The locking box mod I posted previously works really well. I am installing this mod on all new and retro fitting into all ready built boxes.

 

[cdacosta]

Ok lets discuss the mod when adding a ground box lead to a cable. I have done and shown a version for the XLR balanced and SPDIF digital cable. The SPDIF digital cable in relation to this mod would be the same if modding a single ended (SE) RCA cable. In a few days I will be modding a power cord so it will have a permanent ground box cable.

With all the above mods what is being done is adding a ground box lead/cable that will terminate/attach to a ground box. On the cables I have done this mod, all have floating shields. A floating shield is a shield that does not terminate at either end of the cable. With a floating shield the ground cable lead is attached:

* RCA: connector negative terminal of output/source end of cable
* 3-Pin XLR balanced: connector ground terminal (Pin 1) of output/source end of cable. This would be the female XLR.

With a shield you want or is connected to the cable:
* RCA or XLR I would do it like Entreq's EEDS. I have not tried this but it makes sense. Here is info on how Entreq does this, directly from Entreq:
https://www.entreq.com/en-GB/products/cable-presentation-18533631

I have built hundreds of cables throughout the years. One thing for sure is solder colors and effects what is heard. This is why different solder on connections change what is heard. The best soldering joint is when the conductor is in direct contact with the metal it is being joined to. This unfortunately is very difficult for many to achieve. The more resolving a system is, the more of a difference a superior solder joint and quality of solder matters. Most consistent wire to connector connection and usually best performing, would be to eliminate solder/soldering from the equation. This mod eliminates the solder from the joint, ensuring direct contact of conductor to metal of the conductor. Hence purer signal transfer.

NOTE: When adding a ground cable wire to the same solderless connection point of the conductor(s) that is coming from the main cable... make sure the main cable conductor(s) are coming in direct contact to the connection point of the connector. You do not want to spiral the ground box wire together with the main cable conductor(s). Should be main cable conductor(s) in first, then slide ground wire over the main cable conductors, then tighten it all down.

What I am hearing by adding a ground box to a signal transmission cable:

The performance difference I am hearing by adding a ground box to source end of a signal transmission cable (digital or analog), is nothing like how different cables perform in relation to one another. After a ground box is added to a cable, way more micro information can be heard, what is heard is more precise, better separation, better delineation, and has more texture. What I hear is much more pronounced then say one cable vs another cable. I theorize the ground box is removing noise from source component, cable and possibly connecting component's circuitry. Removing of the noise is allowing a purer original signal to be transmitted.

I am finding it really hard to explain in writing what I am hearing after adding a ground box to a signal transmission cable. Let me try this... I was watching Into the Badlands last night. Normally if say leaves are being blown by wind, you hear the wind and leaves being moved. I see the leaves move and my mind understands what is happening. The more of the system that is being filtered with ground boxes the more real it all sounds. After the last balanced cable mod, I not only hear the leaves floating 3D (height width and depth effect), and can hear the direction and a level of detail of the dirt and leaves contacting each other that is eerily real. This kind of experience, and with music is seductive and addictive. I have never experienced anything like this from reproduction of audio.

Here is what I recommend for those that are interested in experiencing, or trying what adding a ground box to a signal transmission cable will do for their system. If you have a cable you already like that you are using, mod that cable. The mod itself is easy to perform. What may be a bit more difficult is the ground box, unless you already have a decent or better ground box. Or you will have to build one with a binding post, like I did. Each cable (left and right) will have a ground cable that will be attached to the same ground box, like in the pic.

 

[basillus]

cable. The SPDIF digital cable in relation to this mod would be the same if modding a single ended (SE) RCA cable. In a few days I will be modding a power cord so it will have a permanent ground box cable.

With all the above mods what is being done is adding a ground box lead/cable that will terminate/attach to a ground box. On the cables I have done this mod, all have floating shields. A floating shield is a shield that does not terminate at either end of the cable. With a floating shield the ground cable lead is attached:

* RCA: connector negative terminal of output/source end of cable
* 3-Pin XLR balanced: connector ground terminal (Pin 1) of output/source end of cable. This would be the female XLR.

With a shield you want or is connected to the cable:
* RCA or XLR I would do it like Entreq's EEDS. I have not tried this but it makes sense. Here is info on how Entreq does this, directly from Entreq:
https://www.entreq.com/en-GB/products/cable-presentation-18533631

Sorry, I want to be sure ;0)
What You have done is connected a Groundbox > groundcable to a RCA or XLR cables -neg/gnd with great result,
but this isn’t what Entreq are doing with theirs EEDS there almost looked like the same as John Swensons JSSG,
there can be done with a shield and a drain wire or 2 shields connected.
If You have get so great result to connect a groundbox to the -neg/gnd of the cable,
won't it be even better if you also connect another groundbox to the floating shield in Entreq's EEDS way?

I still waiting at my rochelle salt, but finally have got the other parts to make a groundbox or 10, like You @cdacosta are doing ;0)
Keep up the good work, it has been a exciting and interesting trip, so far.
Where do You head-fi.orgs get Your wolfram/tungsten powder from and is there a good/cheap place to get it here in Europe?
It has to be pure wolfram/tungsten?
Ask because You can often buy it as tungsten carbide or oxide.

 

[cdacosta]

Sorry, I want to be sure ;0)
What You have done is connected a Groundbox > groundcable to a RCA or XLR cables -neg/gnd with great result,
but this isn’t what Entreq are doing with theirs EEDS there almost looked like the same as John Swensons JSSG,
there can be done with a shield and a drain wire or 2 shields connected.
If You have get so great result to connect a groundbox to the -neg/gnd of the cable,
won't it be even better if you also connect another groundbox to the floating shield in Entreq's EEDS way?

I still waiting at my rochelle salt, but finally have got the other parts to make a groundbox or 10, like You @cdacosta are doing ;0)
Keep up the good work, it has been a exciting and interesting trip, so far.
Where do You head-fi.orgs get Your wolfram/tungsten powder from and is there a good/cheap place to get it here in Europe?
It has to be pure wolfram/tungsten?
Ask because You can often buy it as tungsten carbide or oxide.

Latest purchase for Tungsten, also comes in larger size:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08G3YVJV7?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details

Yes directly to negative for RCA or ground lead for XLR cables. These cables both have individual solid core conductors that are individual shielded. The shields are floating. If the shield in a cable was not floating I would do it like Entreq's EEDS, just have not tried this yet. And yes, the results I have gotten so far filtering cables have been fantastic.

How these ground boxes have transformed my system I cannot put properly into words. What I have learned about how circuit noise effects the sonic reproduction of a audio system is interesting to say the least. In a private post I wrote this earlier today that may help you or someone else...

Ground box filtering works well but is localized. Meaning noise is being removed/drained by ground box from circuitry or AC earth ground wire. But it seems noise from other electronic parts/components and wire/cabling generate and pick up from air borne sources and this still bleeds into system.

In the next few days I will build a separate box and mod the power cord that goes from wall to main distribution PLC. This will be an interesting test. If filtering the wall also improves sonic preproduction, this will confirm a few things. Since the main PLC is already being filtered, most importantly is how much noise transmission cables, whether it is line level, speaker or AC, are acting as antennas and introducing noise into system. Noise that if removed allow for purer signal transmission through system.

If logic prevails and my theory proves true, I will also mod the other power cords. One at a time. To see if using the same ground box that filters say the isolation PLC that powers PC (source component), and filtering the cable will yield even more profound/improved results. Basic idea would be if a power cord is picking up noise during its transmission, filtering at the other end also would remove much of the picked up noise. At the same time the other end/IEC end component's power supply will also be filtered. I will know if this theory works with AC or not after trying this. If this in fact works, wow! This type of filtering would be way too expensive with retail products. I am sure Entreq has tried this, but there is no way they will be able to sell the idea. DIY on the other hand is doable.

 

[cdacosta]

I received 2lbs of Silicon Carbide in 600 grit form. Which is basically powder. I have a question for the users of Silicon Carbide in ground box mineral mix. Have you experienced a settling in time? If yes how long is this settling in time?

Here is the reason I am asking. I currently have 11 ground boxes in my headphone system. Mixing 3 table spoons of the carbide in just one box attached to the amp causes the upper HF to roll off. This is mixing the silicon carbide at the top 20% or so of the mineral mix.

 

[kenincalgary]

I received 2lbs of Silicon Carbide in 600 grit form. Which is basically powder. I have a question for the users of Silicon Carbide in ground box mineral mix. Have you experienced a settling in time? If yes how long is this settling in time?

Here is the reason I am asking. I currently have 11 ground boxes in my headphone system. Mixing 3 table spoons of the carbide in just one box attached to the amp causes the upper HF to roll off. This is mixing the silicon carbide at the top 20% or so of the

I received 2lbs of Silicon Carbide in 600 grit form. Which is basically powder. I have a question for the users of Silicon Carbide in ground box mineral mix. Have you experienced a settling in time? If yes how long is this settling in time?

Here is the reason I am asking. I currently have 11 ground boxes in my headphone system. Mixing 3 table spoons of the carbide in just one box attached to the amp causes the upper HF to roll off. This is mixing the silicon carbide at the top 20% or so of the mineral mix.

Mine isn't powder so it it likely didn't shift much. It had a positive effect in my boxes though I'm not nearly as rigorous as you about monitoring the effect.

 

[cdacosta]

Mine isn't powder so it it likely didn't shift much. It had a positive effect in my boxes though I'm not nearly as rigorous as you about monitoring the effect.

When you first place the silicon carbide in with the other minerals did you hear a difference right away? Did your system sound different over time after placing the silicon carbide in the mix?

 

[kenincalgary]

When you first place the silicon carbide in with the other minerals did you hear a difference right away? Did your system sound different over time after placing the silicon carbide in the mix?

I noticed improved impact and clarity right away. I have no way of knowing how any 1 element ages, I have no patience and am always onto the next tweak.

 

[cdacosta]

After an hour still very obvious the silicon carbide, in the amount I placed into mix added a bit of weight to mid bass frequency range, slightly rolled off upper HF. This causes a slight shrinking of the perceived soundstage. Before adding the silicon carbide there are no perceived walls to the sound stage. Felt wide open, without walls. Also lost some micro detail, nuance and layering.

As soon as I skimmed and removed the top 10% or so of top layer, most of the lost info came back. Then replaced what I removed with just magnetite and is almost like it was prior to adding silicon carbide. Presentation is leaner and not all the info has come back yet. Absolutely mind boggling how so little of something not even in the signal path, at one location in the system, can effect what is heard so profoundly.

 

[cdacosta]

So my vote to use silicon carbide at first is no. If after ground box filtering is setup, then in small amounts in one location first to test. Just make sure can be removed if you do not like the effect.

 

[kenincalgary]

After an hour still very obvious the silicon carbide, in the amount I placed into mix added a bit of weight to mid bass frequency range, slightly rolled off upper HF. This causes a slight shrinking of the perceived soundstage. Before adding the silicon carbide there are no perceived walls to the sound stage. Felt wide open, without walls. Also lost some micro detail, nuance and layering.

As soon as I skimmed and removed the top 10% or so of top layer, most of the lost info came back. Then replaced what I removed with just magnetite and is almost like it was prior to adding silicon carbide. Presentation is leaner and not all the info has come back yet. Absolutely mind boggling how so little of something not even in the signal path, at one location in the system, can effect what is heard so profoundly.

The amount of those silicon carbide

So my vote to use silicon carbide at first is no. If after ground box filtering is setup, then in small amounts in one location first to test. Just make sure can be removed if you do not like the effect.

The amount I used is far less, about 5 or 6 of those little pieces in each box. Negligible by volume or weight.

 

[cdacosta]

The amount of those silicon carbide

The amount I used is far less, about 5 or 6 of those little pieces in each box. Negligible by volume or weight.

Yes I still have a little of it in the mix. I want to see how it settles in. I can tune that box further with Tungsten, Graphite and Rochelle salt if I want to extract more detail or nuance. Just need to hear how it settles in first.

From experimenting with minerals and mineral mixes it is easiest to think of it like this. The main mineral like Magnetite is the base. All the other minerals are like spices in a soup recipe. The other minerals all add or do something different. Rochelle salt is like a binding agent that helps blend it all together. Why adding differing amounts of each of the other supportive minerals make a system sound different is still a mystery to me. I just know the cause and effect. You can read what I share as I learn it from trying and experimenting. Use this as a baseline, you will only really understand once you try it yourself.

 

[basillus]

received 2lbs of Silicon Carbide in 600 grit form. Which is basically powder. I have a question for the users of Silicon Carbide in ground box mineral mix. Have you experienced a settling in time? If yes how long is this settling in time?

Here is the reason I am asking. I currently have 11 ground boxes in my headphone system. Mixing 3 table spoons of the carbide in just one box attached to the amp causes the upper HF to roll off. This is mixing the silicon carbide at the top 20% or so of the mineral mix.

I haven’t used my green silicon carborundum yet, but I bought it a while ago to use it near AC, because this is there Acoustic revieve used its microwave and electromagnetic radiation. They wrote here:
https://www.v1.stereotimes.com/access111208a.shtml


“Certainly a unique feature of the RTP-4 Power conditioner is the potting mix lining the bottom of the chassis, containing quartz, lithic tourmaline and green carborundum. There is only the most cursory information about these materials on the Acoustic Revive site. And their attributed behavior is not what I’d call intuitively obvious, nor are some of the claims of the effect of these behaviors on the AC power. But when I mentioned these to a friend who has a lot of experience working with the energetic fields of minerals, she thought the explanations made perfect sense. With the assistance of Joe Cohen, Aki Monobe (of Acoustic Revive), and the internet, I proffer the following information.

Green carborundum, one of numerous forms of silicon carbide, absorbs electromagnetic radiation. Carborundum is a semiconductor (in fact because it is stable under high-temperature and has high-current density, it is useful in applications where silicon would fail). It also has “high coupling” to microwave radiation (radar, cell phones, repeaters, etc), so it will tend to absorb higher frequency electromagnetic radiation (read: noise). Mr Monobe states, “Green carborundum acts like an antenna and converts the EM energy to heat.

Heat from the green carborundum acts on lithic tourmaline and causes it to generate negative ions.”

So You have right it‘s absorb as tourmaline hf-noise, bad or good? Will try it myself ;0)