advertisement


Puritan Ground Master City… opinions?

naka

pfm Member
I have a Puritan PSM136 and am curious if the Puritan Ground Master City can improve it…
Does anyone have any experiences to share?
Thanks



GMCity_720x.jpg
 
I think the puritan has a grounding socket the op wants to try and see if it improves the 136 .i have my 156 connected to earth rod but not evaluated if it makes any difference
 
I am not clear what the ground master city adds to the party compared to just using the normal mains earth compared to adding in the gound master city but I am a fan of using the pms ground master with external earth rods.
 
I am not clear what the ground master city adds to the party compared to just using the normal mains earth compared to adding in the gound master city but I am a fan of using the pms ground master with external earth rods.
I am not clear either and that is why I am looking for some users feedback… hopping for the best :)
 
I am not clear either and that is why I am looking for some users feedback… hopping for the best :)
I would suggest giving Puritan a call - I've found them to be very upfront about what their kit can and can't do - he even offered to lend me a groundmaster kit to experiment with - seems like a thoroughly decent chap

(I have an issue picking up a local radio ham on my system - theoretically better grounding=better shielding, which I thought might help - he actually suggested that it might actually "improve" my reception of the signal - I have yet to find out....)
 
Picking up radio is an rf issue, shielding, not grounding.

I rather like Puritan's mains stuff, most of it seems to be based on science not magic.
 
Picking up radio is an rf issue, shielding, not grounding.

I rather like Puritan's mains stuff, most of it seems to be based on science not magic.
Forgive my ignorance, but I thought that the effectiveness of shielding very much depended on the quality of the ground that it's connected to (?) - happy to be corrected on this point, but the chap at Puritan didn't seem to contradict my assumption
 
Forgive my ignorance, but I thought that the effectiveness of shielding very much depended on the quality of the ground that it's connected to (?) - happy to be corrected on this point, but the chap at Puritan didn't seem to contradict my assumption
That’s one of the things I’d suggest contributes. Another is the coverage of the shield; 90-95% coverage for braid is not uncommon but I’ve seen coverage as low as 60-70%.
There are also folk out there (I can’t remember the source just now) who argue that a wholly floating shield is the best for audio… go figure.
 
On a single ended connection, rca plug, you have signal + and 0v, sometimes called gnd. The signal positive is connected to the active circuit of the equipment, the 0v can go to chassis, directly back to the 0v in the psu or to the 0v on the circuit. It can be directly or indirectly connected to the chassis or psu, either via wire, a resistor, a capacitor or a diode or any combination thereof. If going to circuit it'll just be wired straight through.

Each of these terminations has a characteristic impedance, and ideally the one with the lowest impedance back to the mains should be your ground. But there's all kinds of exceptions.

If you have a phonostage with MC input there will be a resistor across signal and 0v, at the circuit input for cart loading, this is the number 1 point of rf ingress. The wire from TT to phono, or phono pre amp input, picking up rf. No extra cable will fix this, you either has to float the shield, with a filter of some sort, or slug the input with a small capacitor.

If not connected, or you have no phonostage/input then your issue lies elsewhere. Next question is does one of your components use a smps?

Actually, first question should be what's the type of noise that you have that needs fixing....
 


advertisement


Back
Top