"the upgrade company" <component mods> - Page 12  

Originally Posted by rno63

If in fact $10 worth of parts made the player sound like thousands more would you buy it?

Originally Posted by rno63

But you would rather pay thousands more for lesser sound quality? I don't get your point here. If in fact $10 worth of parts made the player sound like thousands more would you buy it?

Originally Posted by par4

And I'm sure Mr. Schulte speaks highly of you, Mr. Chu.

Originally Posted by Chu Gai

I seriously doubt, given Schulte's credentials, reading his writings, and seeing his work that he could ever work as an entry level technician in a repair shop. Better he should change his last name to Shyster.

Originally Posted by Fanaticalism

.... he calls people who are not his customers ignoramus's.

Originally Posted by rno63

But you would rather pay thousands more for lesser sound quality? I don't get your point here. If in fact $10 worth of parts made the player sound like thousands more would you buy it?

Originally Posted by par4

And I'm sure Mr. Schulte speaks highly of you, Mr. Chu.

Originally Posted by Chu Gai

Posting pictures of something that is modded, regardless of what it is, is hardly childish. Maybe a bit vain. But not childish. It should be something that one is proud to display. There should be an attention to detail and an elegance if you will that speaks to the person's skill and and mastery of his craft. One should be able to point to various aspects of the modification and point out the benefit even it it's only cosmetic. For example, consider this rather substantial modification of an engine.



The owner obviously is not ashamed of the work. He also is unlikely to reply when asked what's the car's 1/4 mile or top end is with "It's pretty quick. I like it a lot better." The equivalent in audio would be "It sounds much better."

The pictures I posted are indicative of sloppiness bespeaking the skills of a person doing plastic surgery without the proper qualifications. They're something to be rather ashamed of. I suspect yours, rno63, to be equally abysmal looking. Schulte does not perform initial benchmarks for if he did he'd have reference points and if there was a problems he could intelligently discuss them with the customer. As a result, he cannot provide tangible measurements indicative of how the unit performs afterwards. Just some subjective audiophile terms that have been used for years that speak to a person's emotional reaction. This is quite unlike when people are modding PC's, cars, or something to do with photography. I seriously doubt, given Schulte's credentials, reading his writings, and seeing his work that he could ever work as an entry level technician in a repair shop. Better he should change his last name to Shyster.

Originally Posted by rno63

Looks good but runs bad! Or does it? How do we know by a picture? Got anymore jack

Originally Posted by MrHiEndAudio

Ah, it's not "eavsdropping" when you are a "direct party to the conversation".
Don't try and play lawyer when you're clearly not. I have consulted several lawyers on this recording technique used to catch liars and crooks, and they have all said that it is perfecty legal. Michigan Law clearly states that "any person may record the conversation as long as you are a direct party to the conversation".

Originally Posted by CruelInventions

ergo, par4 = ignoramus

Originally Posted by Chu Gai

Got to hand it to you par4 for doing pro bono work defending that hack.

Originally Posted by par4

I'm not in the business of defending anybody. To all those who have not owned or listened to a product of this individual and have gleefully resorted to name calling and accusations is, well, predictable and for the most part laughable. But given that it's the usual cast of characters whose condescension and insults are now not a question of if, but when, on these threads, that response is now the norm and carries with it the associated level of credibility. We have heard both sides from owners of TUC's mods, and the readers can certainly ascertain their own conclusions from the testimony given. I'm sure more forum members would be interested to hear from any other owners of electronics modified by TUC who may want to technically challenge the work done. If Mr. Schulte and his business enterprise are indeed a sham the marketplace will surely determine that and sort it out, contributions by some of the geniuses in this thread notwithstanding. For those direct descendants of Inspector Clouseau who have so ably contributed their junior G-men detective work to this topic, I'm sure the readers will file this important information in the appropriate bin.

Originally Posted by TweakerInWA

Irregardless of which side of the fence you'd like to place yourself on, this whole thing has "fishy" written all over it.

1. Why does this guy tape conversations with customers? Seems to be awfully paranoid about something...

2. If I'm throwing 1K at someone, I sure the hell want to know what I'm paying for. Anyone that sends equipment off to this guy to get "Upgraded" without knowing what's included in said activity is beyond foolish. My apologies to you folks that have done so, but seriously????

3. It's not "His" product the end user purchased, it's still a Denon/Pio/Marantz/Onkyo etc....

4. Device calibration (Plasma's/LCD's/LED's) is a business, yet we discuss how to do it, the tools required and the information needed to accomplish it openly. There are a few "Tricks of the trade", that some like to keep to themselves. But for the most part it's an open topic of discussion. Calibrator's and Novices alike share information.

The Professionals still get hired to calibrate even as most folks here do what they can on their own to the best of their ability. To think FOR ONE SECOND that more than 2% of the people here would have the balls to crack open a Pioneer SC-27 (or whatever model they own) and start replacing components and pulling crap apart, soldering, rewiring is beyond RIDICULOUS!!!!!!!!
So to think that TUC would have to keep it's work regime "Under Wraps" holds absolutely NO WATER!!!! As a matter of fact, it would be the exact opposite occuringing if the guy was on the straight and narrow. Sorry, but I'm familiar with good business models, and the one in this thread falls short of sounding anywhere near "good", as a matter of fact I would catagorize it as "Needs Investigating"....

Originally Posted by par4

Obviously you express deep concern over this matter. No doubt first thing Monday morning you'll be on the phone with TUC discussing these matters with Mr. Schulte and "investigating". You can then relate your first person experience with the rest of the forum and provide the readership with the results of that conversation........

Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans

Regardless, irregardless is not a word.

Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans

I stand corrected. It is a word. Just a word that should not be used because it is incorrect and containing a double negative. Ain't is technically a word too, regardless of how incorrect it may be as well...

sorry.... pet peeve of mine...

from the other two definitions from the page containing yours at dictionary.com

ir·re·gard·less (ĭr'ĭ-gärd'lĭs)
adv. Nonstandard
Regardless.

[Probably blend of irrespective and regardless.]

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Word Origin & History

irregardless
an erroneous word that, etymologically, means the exact opposite of what it is used to express, attested in non-standard writing from 1912, probably a blend of irrespective and regardless. Perhaps inspired by the double negative used as an emphatic.
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper

Originally Posted by A9X-308

When I was building modified cars, everything was measured and kept in the notes so that any mods could be assessed and kept discarded based upon whether it made a worthwhile difference or not or whether that difference compromised some other aspect of performance. This is typical for all race teams and most of the modders I know.

Now, lets see the measurements of the stock units and those of the TUC modified ones.

Originally Posted by rno63

Take the measurements in your own living room and your own system. If you don't like how it measures then send it back.

Originally Posted by rno63

Take the measurements in your own living room and your own system. If you don't like how it measures then send it back. Who else does this in the modding world?

Originally Posted by TweakerInWA

Send it back?
As stated earlier in the thread, you don't get your "non-jacked" gear back. It was clearly stated that "he buy's it" (prorated amount I'm sure) from you.

On top of that, hypothetically, let's say I send my brand spanking new SC-27 to TUC, they blow some air in it, or whatever. I get it back and two weeks later I'm having some kind of issue with it?
Who do I send it to for repair? I have a feeling that TUC isn't going to take resposibility for it, because I'm sure they covered themselves in the recorded phone conversation we had that when you agreed to service they would hold no future resposibility for problems with the unit once it leaves their chop shop in "working condition", And now that I've voided my warranty I'm in a position that nobody want's to ever be in. Brand new piece of broken gear, no warranty and god know's what's been done to it on the inside that could be causing the problem....

Please correct me if I'm wrong somewhere in there ???

Originally Posted by par4

I'm not in the business of defending anybody. To all those who have not owned or listened to a product of this individual and have gleefully resorted to name calling and accusations is, well, predictable and for the most part laughable. But given that it's the usual cast of characters whose condescension and insults are now not a question of if, but when, on these threads, that response is now the norm and carries with it the associated level of credibility.

We have heard both sides from owners of TUC's mods, and the readers can certainly ascertain their own conclusions from the testimony given. I'm sure more forum members would be interested to hear from any other owners of electronics modified by TUC who may want to technically challenge the work done.

If Mr. Schulte and his business enterprise are indeed a sham the marketplace will surely determine that and sort it out, contributions by some of the geniuses in this thread notwithstanding. For those direct descendants of Inspector Clouseau who have so ably contributed their junior G-men detective work to this topic, I'm sure the readers will file this important information in the appropriate bin.

Originally Posted by Chu Gai

Sure, and it's my hope this thread serves to alert people and cause them to reflect on the wisdom of doing business with him. Then he can do some honest work collecting golf balls from the forests and water hazards for resale.

*Locked threads can sometimes be unlocked for very good reasons in Source to the Ear*
David (Mr. Schulte-ed.) took me up on my offer and asked if he and a friend Al (whom was mentioned in the thread) could post. I told him sure, just email the posts to me first, then I will determine if I can unlock the thread. Three days later David emailed me his post. I checked my emails about 11 hours after receiving his email with the post (I once in a while have other things at hand then my email and audiocircle :wink and also found another threat from him in my inbox. I kindly asked that the threats cease, for I was trying to help, but only received more threats. I explained that if the threats continued, I would cease to be spend my time dealing with him, and therefore would not unlock the thread. David didn't get it, the threats continued.

Eventually I was told (among a long list of thing) that I had "have not helped one iota", been called an "idiot", and told I should "undergo a psychological evaluation." I usually can take some personal attacks, but the final insult finally broke me. I had a cousin take his own life, my means of a shotgun to the head, due to schizophrenia. I told David this and instead of apologizing, he told me that "Perhaps you are also affected with symptoms, it appears you are. Seek a professional opinion please."