AVS Forum banner

How do I verify - or debunk - the claims of The Upgrade Company?

74K views 2K replies 101 participants last post by  pepar 
#1 ·
I am an extremely happy owner of an Onkyo 5508. My understanding it that it is virtually identical to the Integra 80.2 with the only differences being the design of the face and a minor feature (or two?) like Pure Audio.


Now The Upgrade Company is offering the 5508 and is making some claims that I don't think are accurate, but would like to find out about. They claim that "The Integra DHC-80.2 prepro is similar internally, however Integra is a consumer line, not a pro line. The Integra 80.2 sounds inferior to the Onkyo Pro 5508. The Integra 80.2 exhibits weaker bass response, a rolled off top end, sounds eiled and slightly less defined in direct comparison to the Onkyo Pro 5508."


I have heard both units .. not in the same system .. and did not notice any deficiencies in the 80.2.


They go on to claim that "The Onkyo Profesisional 5508 prepro has been designed and built to "Pro" standards, not consumer like Marantz, Integra, Anthem, Classe, McIntosh & others that use less costly switching power supplies, often pseudo-balanced architecture."


Again, it is my understanding that these two units are identical inside. So, either my understanding is wrong, or this is a bald-faced attempt to mislead people.


Which is it?


Jeff


Disclaimer: Before any TUC fans get their panties in a bunch here, I am merely asking the question. If someone from TUC wants to drop in and document their claims, that would be great! Also note that I am not calling into question the value of TUC's upgrades nor claims of performance improvements; this is strictly regarding their claims that the 80.2 is both substantially different from and inferior to the 5508.


It's been brought to my attention that the link above doesn't work. Apparently, AVS doesn't allow links to them. OK, click on the link and replace the **** with (remove the spaces "u p g r a d e c o m p a n y")
 
See less See more
#104 ·
Just because people can be fooled into thinking ... PERCEIVING ... a difference between two bottles of the SAME water doesn't mean that all water tastes the same, much less that all audio gear sounds the same.


When I got my 5508 set up I listened to my most familiar music. And I heard detail that I never heard before. Underneath louder passages, I heard small details never noticed before - the drummer/percussionist doing some very dainty snare work for example. I am not imagining these things. When I say my 5508 sounds a lot better than my 885, I have specific reasons.


Jeff
 
#105 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar /forum/post/20486217


Just because people can be fooled into thinking ... PERCEIVING ... a difference between two bottles of the SAME water doesn't mean that all water tastes the same, much less that all audio gear sounds the same.

No, but once you acknowledge that the mind can perceive differences where none exist, you have to acknowledge the necessity of ensuring that the factors that cause the mind to perceive differences where none objectively exist are removed. Otherwise, you cannot state with ANY confidence that what you perceived isn't simply in your mind.
 
#106 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/post/20486278


No, but once you acknowledge that the mind can perceive differences where none exist, you have to acknowledge the necessity of ensuring that the factors that cause the mind to perceive differences where none objectively exist are removed. Otherwise, you cannot state with ANY confidence that what you perceived isn't simply in your mind.

Nah, I really don't. I trust my ears in this case. You don't have to, though, and apparently don't trust my ears. But that's OK because my increased enjoyment of my system does not hinge on you ... or anyone else ... believing that it sounds better. I will toss in here that the three other local HT enthusiasts who are familiar with my system think it sounds better, and one of them also upgraded from the 885/9.8 to the 5508/80.2 and *his* system has the same increased inner detail I hear in mine.


I don't know that it'll make any difference to you, but I don't own any fancy interconnects ...


Jeff
 
#107 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/post/20486183


You completely missed the point. I'm saying that you as well as everyone else are subject to perceiving things that aren't objectively real. The Penn and Teller video is a perfect example. Those people tasted differences, yet it was a fact that the water wasn't objectively different.

Your example of the 120 grit vs 80 grit sandpaper doesn't apply, because they are in fact objectively different. As for your steak example, if you tasted two pieces from the identical steak, it's highly likely that you would pick the piece you were told came from Ruth Chris as tasting "better" than the piece you were told came from Sizzler. As I said, the mind is capable of perceiving differences where none exist.

No you missed the point . Yes I could tell the difference between same exact cut from the same exact steer because of the 2 very different methods that the Steak Houses use to cook the same steak.

As for sand paper example , how can 2 different models not be objectively different ? one 7 channels the other 9 . one has 24 bit DACS & the other has 32 bit DACS .one has Audyssey XT32 the other does not .The list goes on ..
 
#108 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar /forum/post/20486313


Nah, I really don't. I trust my ears in this case. You don't have to, though, and apparently don't trust my ears. But that's OK because my increased enjoyment of my system does not hinge on you ... or anyone else ... believing that it sounds better.

If all you state is that you subjectively perceive a difference, I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with are the people who state such differences are an objective fact. BTW, I'm glad you don't fall for the interconnect nonsense.
 
#109 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy /forum/post/20486321


Yes I could tell the difference between same exact cut from the same exact steer because of the 2 very different methods that the Steak Houses use to cook the same steak.

Your ability to miss the point is amazing. If it was two pieces cut from the same steak cooked by the same person at the same steakhouse, in other words if the ONLY difference is that you were told the two pieces were from a different steak house, I think you'd perceive differences.


Quote:
one 7 channels the other 9 . one has 24 bit DACS & the other has 32 bit DACS .one has Audyssey XT32 the other does not .The list goes on ..

I have no idea where you got the idea that I said there are no objective differences between 7 and 9 channels, or between room correction and no room correction. FYI, I have an Anthem AVM50V with ARC.
 
#110 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/post/20486378


Your ability to miss the point is amazing. If it was two pieces cut from the same steak cooked by the same person at the same steakhouse, in other words if the ONLY difference is that you were told the two pieces were from a different steak house, I think you'd perceive differences.

there you go making an assumption. No, I would not perceive differences ! as a well versed steak griller from my teens to the present I would tell you that you were trying to fooling me as both steaks were the same.

it's Odd that you'd use a couple of well know slight of hand experts & magicians as a valid scientific comparison

Anyone see the irony there ?
 
#111 ·
All I'm thinking about is a nice juicy medium rare steak.
 
#112 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/post/20486352


If all you state is that you subjectively perceive a difference, I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with are the people who state such differences are an objective fact.

When was the last time you saw someone post an opinion prefaced with anything about it being subjective and listing the things that might have influenced their perception? Don't we all state things like they are facts?


Jeff
 
#113 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/post/20486378


Your ability to miss the point is amazing. If it was two pieces cut from the same steak cooked by the same person at the same steakhouse, in other words if the ONLY difference is that you were told the two pieces were from a different steak house, I think you'd perceive differences.



I have no idea where you got the idea that I said there are no objective differences between 7 and 9 channels, or between room correction and no room correction. FYI, I have an Anthem AVM50V with ARC.

See, that's your problem right there
Flame on!
 
#120 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar /forum/post/20481367


I recently upgraded from an 885 to a 5508 and I must say that the performance far exceeds the 885. I have not measured it, nor do I know how I would have. So, let's not dismiss a member's observations as being unscientific and hyperbole because there are no charts and graphs.Jeff

RobertR where in this post does Jeff state a fact ? plz point that part out to us ?

the "I must say " phrase sounds like a opinion to myself & he goes on to state that it's an observation as well , his observation...
 
#121 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjaudio /forum/post/20485890


^^^^^^


Warren,


I really don't understand your post above. You said you read through the thread but did you read the first post? Jeff is just trying to find out if the 80.2 is indeed different from the 5508 as claimed by TUC.


Then you go on to dismiss others subjective listening impressions but throw your own in by saying:

I for one..have the 885

I have never thought from one thought it was anywhere close to the best I have heard

Is it good..yes...is it anywhere near the best I have heard..no


Then you bring up:

A few points of humor

1.There was a comparo of these new Onkyo/Integra units to an Anthem in one of the posts here


Seriously?......NO..LOL


and:

2. The misstated fact about the 5508 being truly balanced


Its not


To my knowledge there is nothing under $6K in a pre/pro that is "truly" balanced

and certainly no pre/pro made by Onkyo is


Who ever said this was a comparison thread to anything other than TUC's claim of the 5508 being better than the 80.2? It was also TUC who made the statement that the 5508 was truly balanced.


Maybe you should re-read the thread as your post is all over the place.

Not really..I don't you read that correctly


First off...yes..I was stating a point that was subjective..to me

Quite frankly there was some sarcasm in there as well


I could have said my 885 sounds 110% better than the 5508...right?


Next...I am not sure anyone can definitively prove or disprove the similarities between these two units unless they are an Onkyo employee..ie..assembling the units and knows the specific parts etc..right?


So....my point...

how much of what has been stated is subjective and speculation?


Granted...the fully balanced part can be proven quickly by opening the unit


Otherwise...what can be definitively proved?



Warren
 
#122 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by turnne1 /forum/post/20486826


Not really..I don't you read that correctly


First off...yes..I was stating a point that was subjective..to me

Quite frankly there was some sarcasm in there as well


I could have said my 885 sounds 110% better than the 5508...right?


Next...I am not sure anyone can definitively prove or disprove the similarities between these two units unless they are an Onkyo employee..ie..assembling the units and knows the specific parts etc..right?


So....my point...

how much of what has been stated is subjective and speculation?


Granted...the fully balanced part can be proven quickly by opening the unit


Otherwise...what can be definitively proved?



Warren

This is simple, you are arguing that people on here claimed that the 80.2 and 5508 are different. You are also arguing that the 5508 is fully balanced.


NO ONE on this thread has made these claims, the claims were made by The Upgrade Company (TUC) and Prepar just started this thread to find out if it is indeed true or not.


You are arguing points to the wrong people, these are points that TUC has made.

Quote:
So....my point...

how much of what has been stated is subjective and speculation?

That's what we are all trying to find out.
 
#123 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar /forum/post/20485896


Why is that funny? Have you done a comparison, blind or sighted? Or are you, like some that you are poking at, being influenced by what you have read or heard other people say? Is there no way the 5508 can be as good as an Anthem? Which Anthem .. they have at least two different quality "levels" .. ?


Just asking ....



Jeff

Actually..I have not listened to the 5508


But I was just in my local AV dealer this after noon that carries both Anthem and Integra( as well as Krell, McIntosh, Ayre,Cary,Denon etc)


So..yes..I am very aware that Anthem has two different quality levels

One was a little more than twice the price of the 80.2 and the other was about 3 times the price of the 80.2


I listened to all three of them today in the showroom


Actually ..IF I was influenced by what people say I was say the 80.2 was the best thing since sliced bread with the new "highs and wides" and that the other stuff was just "overpriced".


Trust me..after listening today...I don't agree with what I have "heard"..I say that in reference to the Onkyo and Integra threads in this forum...truthfully I have not really read the Anthem threads. I would imagine if I read the Anthem threads the owners would say they have the best thing since "sliced bread" and their products are worth every penny they paid...


Though to be fair...I do believe the Statement D2V is the "reference" piece in preamps in many of the audiophile publications


According to the salesguy at Genesis Audio(Gahanna Ohio)...where I listened to the pieces today

The Integra 80.2 has the option of the custom Audessey programming that the Onkyo does not have

I have no idea if thats true...but they charge $400 for this optional service


Back to the Anthem..in no way did the 80.2 sound as good as the AVM50V or the Statement


In regard to Home theater...I would say the 80.2 was 85-90% of the AVM 50...and frankly the Statement sounded, to my ears, about the same as the AVM50

Both Anthems and the Integra were connected to their same brand, respectively, multichannel amp


Where the big difference lies was in music, I listen to a lot of contemporary jazz with instrumentals

Not even close...both Anthems all day long by a wide margin. If I assigned a percentage as I did above...where the Statement was 100%, I would say the Integra was 65% and the AVM50V 90%

The salesman suggested that some have bought a good 2 channel preamp for music...as he had done

For some reason that is not something I thought desirable


Now..if you want to talk $$...what I could not justify was the difference in price between the AVM 50V and the Statement D2


I would say the lower model(AVM50V) is 95% of the Statement...considering the aspects I am interested in. Things like the better video processing in the Statement are worth nothing to me..as I only watch HD sources and would prefer a 100% video pass through from the source material


So...the question could be...does the 5508 sound like the 80.2?


if I were a betting man I would say yes...if anything I guess the 80.2 should have a notch up on the 5508


The salesman told me the Anthem room correction was better than Audessey...who knows


This is a shop that does a lot of custom install business. In fact that is really their market niche...not the "walk in and buy a component type of customer"...so perhaps he knew what he was talking about


I have never thought a room correction program could make up the difference for big variances in component quality


So that is my take from listening to several units this afternoon


any other questions?



Warren
 
#124 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjaudio /forum/post/20486869


This is simple, you are arguing that people on here claimed that the 80.2 and 5508 are different. You are also arguing that the 5508 is fully balanced.


NO ONE on this thread has made these claims, the claims were made by The Upgrade Company (TUC) and Prepar just started this thread to find out if it is indeed true or not.


You are arguing points to the wrong people, these are points that TUC has made.




That's what we are all trying to find out.

Other than the fully balanced part of it...which can proven and quickly with disassembly and a camera


what can you(or TUC) definitively prove( or disprove) one way or another?


Does someone in this thread work for Onkyo and has information on parts and assembly?...and could back this up with documentation?



This goes for TUC as well and the ability to disprove anything they have said


So you..in theory you could go round and round...and neither side( argument) has definitive evidence one way or another than can be proven?


My thought is unless TUC met the above requirements why is what they say even of any merit or frankly worth the time spent on checking it out?


You could start your own thread and say just the opposite thing...right?

The first question I would ask is if this was even credible information...using the above criteria


That is my point


Warren
 
#126 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/post/20486352


If all you state is that you subjectively perceive a difference, I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with are the people who state such differences are an objective fact. BTW, I'm glad you don't fall for the interconnect nonsense.

Sorry,


In the right circumstances and with the proper equipment cables- ICs, Coax, speaker and quite possibly HDMI for audio, and power cords can make a difference in the audio. Some cables and power cords in my system when changed can be noted immediately.


Rich
 
#127 ·
Warren, your observations re the Statement, AVM and the 80.2 are exactly what my preconceived ideas lead me to expect. Anthem has some really smart people and they do a lot of things really well. I'm sure ARC is great at room correction. (Comparing it to Audyssey is pretty much impossible, so let's make them equal.) But I had $1500 for a pre/pro, not $3k or $6k or whatever. And coming from my 885, the 5508 is stunningly superior. If I were on a higher rung of the economic ladder, I might be an Anthem owner.


Jeff
 
#128 ·
Wow Warren,


So you went into a store and listened to 3 separate systems in I would guess 3 separate rooms and from this you got all the information to set us all straight. I guess I was dumb to go ahead and purchase all these pre-amps to try in my own system, in my own room, with all the same electronics and speakers and make up my own mind.


The truth is that a pre-amp could be the best in a particular system and be not as good in another. Instead of relying on a salesman on anyone else to tell me what is the best I prefer to buy the product I am interested in and listen for my-self. In the end it is not what others think my system sounds like, but what is pleasing to me.


And please don't think that I may be jealous because I can't afford the Anthem D2V, I have owned a pre-pro that retails for twice the price and also owned an Anthem when they first came out. It doesn't matter to me what the product costs, only that it sounds good to me. Hopefully the 5508 is a great pre-pro, I will receive it on Tuesday, if it's not then I will sell it and try something new.


I am not going to go round and round on this as it has strayed way of topic so I will just drop it from here on out.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top