"the upgrade company" <component mods> - Page 73  

If the tin foil fits, you must acquit.

Anybody find out for sure if avs was the other forum to receive a letter (I can't imagine they wouldn't be) and what the response was?

Another brilliant maneuver by DS. Trying to bully audio forums is no way to gain a good business reputation. I'm really having a hard time understanding exactly what DS is trying to do here. The more he speaks the more he seems to put his foot in his mouth. I would love to hear more replies from you, MrHiendaudio.

I would guess that DS is really taking a pounding from this thread and possibly the one on audioholics. Even though he says business is booming the negative exposure limits the pool from where he can draw possible customers. Do a google on The Upgrade Company and this thread shows up. I can not believe someone interested in having mods done would use TUC after reading through this thread.

Bill

Well, that would apply to rational audiophiles But then, they would not even entertain such a move in the first place.

Any updates....

Obviously if the meaurements back it up then we will just argue that those measurements are inaudible and its still not worth the $$$

Unless, he manages to screw it up so badly that it could be audible.

3 more happy customers here in The Netherlands who bought the Oppo SE Signature editions from TUC.

Still did not listen to one of the TUC Oppo's?

I can´t believe this thread is still going on.

and I can't believe that folks still place any value on quasi-anonymous testimonials, or improperly conducted comparison tests. See this post.

PS: Does the inside of the TUC Oppo look anything like other examples of TUC workmanship?

Supposedly that blue goop is anti vibration"magic". Take a look at the board. It has been painted on copper traces that are bonded to the PCB, and most glaring of all, look at the switches, controls etc on the front panel. The electrical contacts of these mechanical components are used to secure the boards.

There is NO support between the PCB and the front panel, and from years of personal experience, this is THE WORST way to manufacture a PCB and should have been corrected by TUCs "upgrades" to pigtail jumpers from the control to the PCB.

Everything I build (switchers, computer remotes, mixers etc) has flexible pigtails from the rigid control panel and the connection backplane to a well supported PCB. That way IF a switch etc. should break, replacement is fast and easy and does not mean removal of the board.

This design concept affords a greatly increased safety margin from physical damage by mishandling, accidental impact etc.

I still have a hard time believing anyone with a modicum of common sense can look at this and seriously say "I would pay a couple grand for that".

is that the extent of the 'mods'?
the blue stuff and tinfoil?

we're actually looking at the rear of the device, those appear to be XLR connectors, and maybe they are structually supported internally, and are 'floating' through openings in the case...

or if it is case connected, and everything is rigid, it may not be an issue imo
it's nothing compared to the 'mods'

The red device in the center is a mini SPDT toggle switch and there appears to be either RCA or BNC jacks aside of the XLRs. All still rigidly fixed. Usually in a home system this is not an issue, BUT since TUC seems to think vibration is a problem, they "damped" non movable conductors and ignored those that DO have a possibility of fracturing or "mushrooming" from the solder side of the PCB.

There are numerous axial lead components very loosely fastened to the board and with various lengths of exposed leads. Else where in the unit you do NOT see that. VERY poor quality "construction".

TUC claimed parts upgrades but has abjectly refused to provide any data via part numbers etc. I believe that is because I openly challenged DS to give me a number of any part he replaced and his choice of a replacement I promised to publish ALL the data. Soon after the last post of mine offering that service he disappeared.

Funny thing #2 is when I posted that I am in the process of designing and building a cable DBT test system with digital logic and zero user control, Joe S of JPS labs beat a hasty retreat as well.

What is there to listen to? And, do you by chance have two on hand, one modded the other not to compare? Properly of course, no haphazard biased stuff will do.

I understand that DS "is" on another "well deserved" vacation. Can't wait to have him tell us where he went this time. Hope he provides pics.

Here's what customers have to say about our EMM LABS CDSA-SE upgrade:

In a message dated 12/31/2008 10:09:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, fonedavid@yahoo.co.uk writes:

Hi David,

Yes, your modded CDSA slaughtered the Clearaudio Master Reference turntable setup so much so that he is thinking of selling it now.

To be very honest, I never really liked Esoteric's signature sound even with the big 5 box combo and I personally want to get away from multi box combos as I do not run a computer based server which need a seperate dac.

Im looking forward in sending you my next player to get even more performance now that I physically have 2 x Velodyne DD-18 subs staring at me.....

All the best.

Kind regards,
David
__________________________________________________________

In a message dated 12/29/2008 8:59:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, fonedavid@yahoo.co.uk writes:

Hi David,

My mad friend came to listen to the CDSA-SE and was shocked how great it sounded and then asked me to take it to his house for a demo. It sounded even better there and we compared it to a average Townsend Rock turntable with the same song on black plastic ( Eagles Live )... lets just say, the CDSA made the turntable sounded THIN, FLAT and LIFELESS.

We have yet to compare it to his reference Clearaudio master ref. deck but he did say that the CDSA so far is 95-98% performance...wowowowowowoo.

He then got his cash out on the table to temp me to sell it but I refused....he was shocked again by my reaction...


__________________________________________________________

To repeat myself:

What value testimonials?




http://www.skepdic.com/testimon.html

We install very high cost highest performing parts in the CDSA in place of the cheap generic "For Profit" parts that have no busines being used in an $11,500 CD Player such as the one pictured above. More then 100 parts.

If our customers did not hear the huge improvement we promise them, they'd ask for a refund. Instead customers expectations are consistenly exceeded.

That blue dampening fluid is used by some high end audio manufacturers, some communication equipment manufacturer's, some plasma TV manufacturers and I hear Siemens uses it on MRI machines. Also the US Military uses a more expensive version that is black in color and very similar, but restricted for sale only to the US Military.

Aluminum Foil is used by many manufacturers now including Ayre, Denon, Marantz, Onkyo, Pioneer Elite, Esoteric and many others.

Here's another EMM LABS upgrade testimonial from a UCLA Professor of Music and Professional Musician and Composer Paul Reale:

EMM Labs CDSD-SE & DAC6e-SE SACD/CD transport & dac upgrade

I originally became interested in the Upgrade Company, because EMM Labs, the manufacturer of my digital front end, had just released a new and "improved" pair of CD transport and DAC; and, I was not prepared to spend an additional $20K after only two years: EMM offered no upgrade path from what I had.

As a composer and professional musician, I have exposure to the sound of live instruments and voices on an almost daily basis. The chief deficiencies in recorded sound usually involve the sense of timbral rightness and instrumental weight, which give instruments and voices the stable image and the sense of being in the listening room. Traditionally, the best LP's can provide much of this illusion, but at the expense of real dynamic range and image clarity. The digital format in general, and CD's in particular have the potential to provide an adequate dynamic spectrum with greater channel separation, but until the last few years, all CD front ends have fallen short. I selected EMM Labs CDSD and DAC6e (both Signature Editions) because the pair came close to the "believable illusion."

However, I was not prepared for the quantum leap in performance these units exhibited after being upgraded by David Schulte of The Upgrade Company. All the residual flatness of the image disappeared, and the sense of each instrumental or vocal space was created after the manner of the finest analog reproduction with the preservation of dynamic and frequency range. Schulte's upgrade unlocks the potential in CD's which I would have not thought possible. The most revealing feature is the ability of each instrument to occupy its own space, independent of other instruments and within the balance of the total ensemble. This particular advantage I have never heard in recorded sound, primarily because the apparent loudness of live instruments is an illusion created by their presence, rather than real acoustic power (e.g. and violin playing as loud as it can generates about .02 acoustic watts, while the bass drum in a normal loud passage will generate 20 acoustic watts).Obviously, high end manufacturers cut corners on their basic components, like resistors and capacitors. In addition, I suspect that power supplies are largely short changed and leads which should be shielded are left exposed to RF and vibrations.

With an archive of over 10,000 CD's and SACD's, collected over the last 25 years, it would be an understatement to say that I was more than pleased with the upgrade. As an added bonus, the sense of background quiet and three dimensionality was something I had never heard with any format, save a few direct-to-disk LP's. In my collection of over 15,000 LP's I have many CD counterparts, which allowed me
to compare the analog with the digital. I would say that largely, the CD's played on the modded EMM pair surpassed the LP's.

I really feel that my digital front end is unquestionably now "the best of the best."

In retrospect, what I wonder is: in very high end units that cost in excess of $25,000, why are the manufacturers not seeing the huge potential in their mostly excellent designs. Dave Schulte is a person
who has the ability and experience to realize this potential. He even generously gave me tips on upgrading my speaker crossovers, which I performed while my EMM units were at the Upgrade Company.

To top it off, having a friends stock EMM LABS CDSD-SE and DAC6e-SE directly on hand for comparison lent total precision to my evaluation of the upgrades.

My advice: send your equipment to the Upgrade Company and find out what you have been missing.

Paul Reale,
Canoga Park CA

Here's another customer review of TUC (with the same amount of credibility as the ones posted above):

TUC is a scam operation run by snake oil salesmen with absolutely no knowledge of electronics. Simply looking at their horrendous 'work' is enough to convince anyone with common sense, or basic electronics knowledge, that they do nothing but overcharge for destroying your warrenty.

AUDIOGON Learn > Forums > Digital > 1233011331 Start New Thread | Log In | *

"Wadia 781i vs dcs puccini"

usa vs uk who has the best all in one cd/sacd player?

Usarmyvet91 (Threads | Answers)

01-26-09

Responses
01-27-09: Flashunlock
I owned the Wadia 581-SE and auditioned the 781i and the Puccini. I currently also own the DCS classic Verdi Encore & Elgar plus which sound much better to the Puccini IMO. Funny thing is, I found the 781i to be a bit softer sounding than the 581-SE. It lost the scale and resolution to the 581-Se.

The Emm Labs CDSA-SE ( latest version ) even in stock form IMO out class all of the players mentioned but my unit has been upgraded and is now the best sounding player I have heard to date regardless of price.

Hope this helps.
Flashunlock (Threads | Answers)

"duvetyne" why do you post such nonsense? The Upgrade Company LLC is A+ Certified by the Better Business Bureau and we have earned high praise from audiophiles the world over. All real genuine customer tesimonials.
We have never been sued, we've never even had a chargeback. All this nonsense in this forum is just pure garbage, not based on facts nor reality.

We provide our customers the very highest sound quality obtainable at any price. Factory built high end audio is full of garbage. Generic "For Profit Built" parts and an obscene lack of shielding and dampening, which are just as important as the parts.

Real audiophiles, real people, agree with our claims. In fact one such Esoteric upgrade customer is a Forum Moderator no less!

You should be ashamed of yourself for posting so many false words to the internet.

You know what's 1000 times better than quoting bunch of testimonies? Measurements. Lets see some.

To counter your nonsense, duh.


Just like mine!


No you don't...I read a review that said otherwise. You're not telling the truth.


Wow...the irony is amazing.

How do you live with yourself, considering all the lies and half truths that you've posted in these fora alone?

This guy's advertising is so good, I wonder if he can make water into wine?

Or is that a proprietary secret, patented and copyrighted similarly to TUC's modding process?



To date, TUC/DS has yet to provide any "measured proof" that their mods influence the technical parameters required for one to hear an audible difference.

I'm hesitating to send my $300 Sony Cassette Walkman to him for an upgrade.

I see Mr. HEA has decided to post more claptrap. Something I wanted to point out to those looking at these pics. It appears that all the nomenclature heat-shrunk markings on the electrolytic caps has been removed. This causes 2 major issues. First, there is no no way aside from a schematic and label mask on the board to identify the part and whether or not it is even installed correctly, that plastic sleeve is also an insulator. The metal can that is the exterior of the cap is at the same potential as the negative lead. Removing that sleeve now will allow for some very probable shorting issues between can that do NOT share the same ground potential.

BTW I have a good friend who works with Lockheed on the development of the new strike fighter. I have sent him a link to this site and claims made about the AVM. His response? In a word BULLSH*T!! The military and its contractors do NOT use any such crap on any circuit in any device on any aircraft or avionics system. PERIOD. Cabling susceptible to RFI and EMI is not wrapped in aluminum sticky backed HVAC duct tape for "shielding". Such cables are spec'd and purchased with the appropriate shielding in the form of flexible BRAIDED shields.

Mr HEA, it is one thing to make flowery unverifiable claims about your silly baseless and totally BS "mods" but now you have stepped over the line and I will say it right out: YOU ARE A LIAR. There is NO usage of any of your methods or the AVM goop by the legitimate electronics industry, much less the military or its contractors.

You have refused to give out a part number for any device you change to an "upgraded" version. Again, you are a liar. The industry has performance standards and specifications for all parts. This basically takes the form of +/- tolerances. However for many parts, those tolerances afford no deficiency in performance of specification.

Again I challenge you here and now to provide some actual part numbers and I will provide all the data from the original and your "replacement". I DARE YOU.
Grow some cajones and publish the data.

Which came first Mr HEA or the egg?

This thread has run its course...