Entreq ground conditioners - what's the theory?


Entreq and other products boast conditioning the ground to help improve the sound. Being completely clueless about anything electrical, I am very curious what the theory is behind this product and technically how it can improve the quality of the power and thus the music. I am not looking to argue if these products do as they advertise. I just want to learn more about the idea.
tboooe
Ivan, there is one device known as the 'Intelligent Chip' that was most definitely a scam. Not sure if that is the same one that you mention above. Neither the Bybee or the Marigo dots rely on any quantum effects, and if their advertising says so, I would take it with a grain of salt.

You are right that there is always electrical noise. The question is really how much of an effect you are able to have on it by correct grounding. It turns out that you can indeed have an effect. However, this is why I mention correct ground schemes in your actual amp/preamp/whatever as this is where the grounding will yield the greatest benefit.

If the equipment uses a poor grounding scheme, it will be prone to all sorts of external effects such as RF, ground loops and of course alternative grounding. What I am getting at here is sort of like snuffing out a match as opposed to trying to put out a forest fire. If you can snuff the match and not burn the forest, you will be a lot better off. The same applies to correct grounding in audio equipment, but what strikes me as odd is that many 'high end' audio designers don't seem to be grounded (pardon the expression) in the principles for effective grounding.
Atmosphere, come to think of it, I may have been wrong to include the Marigo dots, but, no, the WA Quantum chips and the Intelligent chip are 2 different things (but, as I said above, there are certainly quantum scams to be found out there). From what I've read (interviews with Jack Bybee, reviews and, yes, the advertising) Bybee devices do employ quantum physics. Dunno if every word of all that is true, although I don't feel I'm qualified to openly dispute it. Disputing things at this point is not really my goal with all this. I'm still trying to pick up on a lot. I think I see what you are getting at though, but I still see plenty of room for both viewpoints (house grounding and component grounding) to be included. It's your last statement above that sums it up for me..."but what strikes me as odd is that many 'high end' audio designers don't seem to be grounded (pardon the expression) in the principles for effective grounding". I would say that, in all likelihood, is a fair assessment. But, for that very reason, the overall problem remains intractable. How much of the gains to be had can be derived from proper home grounding and how much from proper component grounding? For the present, there seems to be no real way for consumers to confidently, and correctly with a minimal amount of effort, ensure that their components use truly correct grounding schemes (to snuff out the match)...even though, like you say, many manufacturers should likely know better. OTOH, new grounding technologies for the home (the forest) are beginning to emerge and I believe they can in part help compensate for gear with inferior grounding schemes. And, in my mind, it may even be possible that they are going beyond that, but it's still unclear to me. While whether or not the real theoretical goal should be home grounding or component grounding, is, to me, largely intractable, it is not irrelevant. But, from necessarily a practical standpoint, maybe the best hope may lie with the forest. Neither on its own gets rid of all noise, but it does seem to be a big step forward.
Atmosphere, just wait'll ya get a load of the Super Intelligent Chip. By the way, the original Intelligent Chip was the big hit of CES way back in 2005.