"the upgrade company" <component mods> - Page 15  

I wish it was easy to just do a controlled test but it isnt. For this type of mod a controlled test would include the following.

1. The original equipment and the modded equipment side by side but hidden from you so that you do not know which one is being used.

2. Level Matching done to ensure loudness levels are accurate. Some mods just increase decrease loudness. Amazingly people think that is an SQ change.

3. Someone use switches the equipment and you do not see them doing it our their expressions.

This is a start on how to control the tests, People will argue its still not scientific enough, its still not accurate enough but the main point here is that all we are simply trying to remove external influences on our audio experience.

I also always would measure any content from both sources to see if there are measured differences. If there are obvious audible differences, then there are going to be measurement differences backing up those obvious audio difference. If there isnt any measured differences then the audible differences are actually that obvious and its really just a placebo type of difference (ie. some people are going to think its a HUGE difference).

I actually have no problem with anyone's subjective experience being their tool for their purchasing decisions. My main pet peeve is that people will read your very well written but subjective opinion and take it as fact.

They will then spend money based that subjective opinion. Your opinion, along with other "positive marketing" spin almost always convinces a high, high percentage of people search to improve their setup no matter how silly it may seem....they eat that stuff up, its their koolAid

Hi penngray,

Thanks so much for the explanation. My wife and I work together to accomplish items 1-3. We definitely level match, and we use the same power cord and interconnects. In order to do quicker A/B comparisons, we'll use the same brand/model of power cord and interconnects on both, and then after some comparisons, I'll switch the power cords and interconnects just to make sure we still get the same results. We keep from each other which component is being used and we jot down the results. It's only after the listening tests that we learn which component we were listening to for each test.

Regarding item #1, I've also done relative comparisons with different equipment. For example if component B is better than component A, before the upgrade, but component A is better than component B after the upgrade, then I think it shows two levels of improvement. Logically, component A is better after the upgrade than it was stock. In addition, it is now better than component B, where it was initially inferior.

I can honestly say that I've never taken measurements. So, I understand that my results will not be considered valid for those who believe this to be a critical element in a controlled test.

Thanks again,

Dave

Statistical data

PQ-
Improved Black Levels-Contrast/Grey scale
Improved Color saturation/color tracking
Gamma
Color temp
Reduction in artifacts/anamolies

Those to name a few;

All measurable (outside of artifact reduction, but easy to see or prove with side by side or pre/post comparison)and all relevant to improved PQ, a staple of justifying calibration cost and obtaining a STANDARD of visual accuracy....as so much as to provide a detailed report of pre/post STATISTICAL DATA and change.

Your claim is that a TUC modded unit improved your PQ over component to your PDP, I'm asking you for the data that leads you to make such a claim other than your keen eye...That's all

Hi TweakerInWA,

Thanks so much for the details. You may have missed my previous post in this thread, so here's the info on my comparison. My TV is a Pioneer Elite Pro-710HD, which is a CRT TV. I have had it calibrated, and I now get an annual calibration touch up. My TUC modded Pioneer BDP-05FD Blu Ray player goes component into the TV, as there is not any DVI or HDMI connections with this TV. My comparison component is the Arcam DV27A DVD player. My comparisons were done with DVD and not with Blu Ray.

Before the upgrade, the Arcam was the clear winner over the Pioneer, with better blacks and color saturation. Following the upgrade, the Pioneer's blacks and color saturation are just as good, if not just a bit better than the Arcam. Following the upgrade, the Pioneer's video is more clear and more detailed than the Arcam. Again, this is what I am "seeing", when comparing the two. My wife also noticed the same. The first movie she saw on the upgraded unit was Bee Movie, and she couldn't believe how clear it looked on the Pioneer.

From memory, I believe I'm seeing the same improvements on Blu Ray (compared to what it was before the upgrade), but in all fairness, I understand folks won't consider this as valid, until I can do a comparison with a stock player.

I do not have any equipment to measure these things, so I understand my subjective comparison will not satisfy those folks who prefer "measured" comparisons/results.

Thanks again,

Dave

Then let me make another observation here, if I am in the business of "upgrading" electronics and my main selling point is improved acoustic and video reproduction, you would think I would have some kind of statistical data to back up my claims. Otherwise, what I end up with is a few folks running around saying it's great, but they can't really tell me or anyone else why...

Once again, if this was "MY" business you'd be damned sure I would have done some kind of controlled testing to validate my claims by now considering the question marks surrounding my "Business"...I'm sure someone (Hopefully a reputable site like this one or Secrets etc..), at some point (that has the money to waste) is going to spend the money for one of these "upgrades" and before they do will run a unit through a gambit of documented testing and parts inventory before sending the unit off, and once again when it returns. I'm hoping this occurs in the near future, as I have a feeling people are getting taken advantage of and getting ripped off by an internet marketing scam that should be shut down.

Funny how people are getting ripped off and writing rave reviews. Even Classba writes a stellar review! I don't think Upgrade Company Customers want then to go anywhere. Too good and a good following. They can't please all and no business can but It seems they have pleased plenty. I see 5 or 6 happy customers just on this one little ole thread. Looks like the positives out weigh the negatives.

Enough already with the continuous smoke screen BS. Considering the "Claims" made by the business we're discussing and the "5 or 6" posters that continue to bellow the smoke, I've seen nothing (and I know I'm not alone) that substantiates anything said by those "5 or 6" individuals. Just more posts containing "I thought it sounded better"..Great!.

Then you have one individual who actually took a peek at what was done and low and behold, what does he see? for $1,000 he got 4 new ferrites that run $1.50 each and a foil job that looked worse than the last one my wife had done on the highlights in her hair. And because he didn't want to play the hush, hush game has been put through hell to get his equipment back in good repair. Sure, you keep up the good work, but when the whole thing eventually comes falling down, you can crawl back into your cave and live with what you've done in shame..enjoy !!

Or hey, how about just providing a spec sheet of what a Mod consists of to include parts replaced and changes made, as well as expected improvements and in what area's. I could live with that, but until that happens I think everyone should be made well aware to avoid TUC...

Exactly...so perhaps if we stop posting on this thread it will go away?

Hey, stop banging on about my review as I've said before that it was massively edited by him and I was pushed to write it so that he would try to repair my player.

My player faulted within weeks after I recieved it back from TUC so off it went back to him the 1st time and he blamed a small board which I had to pay for as well as the 2 way shipping. It came back after 2 months then 2 weeks later, the same problem occured again so off it went 2nd time... the transport fault so he said that time and more money to buy a new transport...... 3 months later, still no bloody news and he blamed on static discharge yet he had NO CLUE how to fix it, so I demanded for the player to be shipped to Emm Labs to have a look. To my shock once I finally spoken to Emm's, none of my new parts were fitted and when confronted and proven, he turned VERY NASTY which BTW, the parts are still in his hands and he refused to ship them to Emm's for the repair so now I have paid double the amount for those parts plus more. The guy is a dame thief.

Do you think for 1 min that im a happy customer????? PLS GET REAL.
I have also asked him to delete my review from his web site but it is still there so I guess he really needs the business badly.

You carry on being his disciple since both of you are just full of ....

And yet I keep seeing positive reviews! Even on other sites. That just amazes me after reading all this BS. If it is just foil that you see then why do the units sound so amazing? Why don't I see people saying it is a rolled off blur sound like all the mid-fi equipment I have heard. If it was a rip off and the units did not sound good wouldn't we see a bunch of testimonials telling us this? I don't remember seeing anyone stating that the units from the Upgrade Company sounded bad. Statistics show they actually sound very good according to users. They are mini reviews and some are comparing upgraded low priced units to higher end units with great results. Don't you ever read a good review and want to buy the product? You either believe the review or you don't and I understand but to go on and say it is a rip off without hearing the piece for yourself just seems like another agenda for the day. Furthermore, I don't listen to statistics and either should you!

I am just wondering if you ever got the unit repaired? What parts were replaced or what the problem was. What problem were you experiencing in the first place?

I've been taking a sideways step from the undeniably extravagant claims for the TUC upgrades, and thought about commercial business in broader terms. Yes, the TUC claims seem too good to be true, but are they the only company that promises the World when trying to get new business. Heck No! If I'm honest about it, EVERY company that I have worked for is guilty of exaggerating their capabilty and the accomplishments of their products and services. I produce business proposals from time to time, and whenever I look at standard marketing material for backgrounds and introductions, I usually recognise what is desribed, but I'm also slightly embrassed by the level of capability that is being claimed. Knowing what things are like on the inside - often struggling to deliver against over-ambitious performance, quality and schedule commitments - I figure that customers would really like to know all that before placing contracts. But this isn't something that is confined to my present employer, but applies to every company that I'm familiar with. I think it has to be that way, otherwise the competition will win all the business instead. So I think its a natural, capitalistic, state of affairs where everyone claims to be a bit better than they really are. So lets turn that back on the consumer electronics industry, and see if they are guilty of the same sort of exaggeration as well. I did some searching and found the following actual quotes:

And who makes all these mouth-watering claims? Wouldn't you be happy if you had just one piece of equipment that performed as described above? Believe everything that you read, and you'd think that every piece of expensive electronics was nudging the state of the art. And unfortunately, a lot of advertising-driven reviews seem to support the manufacturers extravagant claims. And the manufacturers concerned are nothing out of the ordinary. I have simply quoted descriptions of players and amplifiers produced by the major, mainstream AV equipment manufacturers: Pioneer, Sony, Denon, Yamaha, Onkyo etc. It would be nice if a $1000 box could indeed live up to such lofty expectations, but my experience is that they generally don't. But what do we do? Does anyone get bent out of shape when their latest box of tricks turns out to be no more than a mediocre re-hash of last-year's model with a new light, a new connector and a sticker with a new acronym, or are we generally happy to accept what we can get?

In a nutshell, my experience of TUC is that while they are not quite too-good-to-be-true, they broadly live up expectations better than other commercial companies do.

regards, Nick

of the upgraded unit. The first one shows what was done to the top lid. The second is another shot of the inside. Is it me, or are the capacitors all a little c0ck-eyed? Sorry for the size, but they do scale well if you want to examine things in more detail.

To the untrained eye it just looks like sloppy work. In reality, each capacitor is precisely aligned for the best sound.

How foolish of me I'm sure they're also aligned in such a way that they can predict eclipses and the changing of the seasons too. Which one ponts to the north star?

Not with my wife, he ain't!!

I was waiting for someone to comment on that. The Dame Thief would have been a good title for a 1960s movie starring Robert Mitchum.

To stay on topic, I wonder how much it would cost to have my PC sound card wrapped in ERS paper and have its caps replaced with a mystical set that will bring out the delicate nuances I so desperately desire.

I just went to the pantry to grab a Pop Tart, the wrappers are all missing!!

Okay, so the company is guilty of not having the best quality workmanship when performing it's mods.

Regardless, if the buyer thinks the upgraded unit gives him extra listening pleasure, as well as a whole bunch of superlatives to describe the unknown updates to friends and family, shouldn't we just say, "Good for you?"

Sure, in the end, it may be proven that this particular company's mods are nothing more than swapping colored caps and extra Reynold's Wrap, but it's still up to the buyer to decide whether or not it's worth the price.

Unless we can absolutely refute the claims the company and it's customers have made, perhaps we should just chalk this one up to capitalism and opportunity.

Sure, until they come here and start recommending this garbage to others.


Maybe you missed this in the very first post:

Do you have any personal experience with the aforementioned company?

If so, please share your scientific findings.

If not, how can you call bs on what the company does?

Like you, I don't like to get fleeced and therefore also try to let others know of a bad experience I've had.

But that's just it: I have had that experience to know that I got fleeced.

Perhaps this would serve better as a response to the OP:


"No, I do not have any experience with this company.
Therefore, I do not have any (personally conducted) scientific studies proving or disproving this particular company's claims.
Just know that, to me, the cost of the upgrades exceeds what I would be willing to pay for the advertised "improvement".

If you do decide to lay out your hard-earned money and purchase the upgrade, please provide an update regarding your before and after measured differences in sound quality.

Thanks. And good luck."

Does anyone with experience have "scientific studies" to back up the their claims? Should we trust the opinions of those who also hear magical differences in PC's and speaker wire? Even though there is no evidence that they make any difference if properly sized?

I guess if we haven't tried it, we can't be critical of thess either?

http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina41.htm

http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina60.htm

If it was garbage, nobody would recommend it.

The way I see it, it is pointless for the banter to continue.

One will never get someone to admit that the 1-2k that they spent on some foil and ferrites that they are suffering from placebo, especially when they've never heard what the unit is SUPPOSED to sound like to begin with.

The same manner that one will not convince those who seek something of substance to quantify what the owners of these mods are stating, especially when they have no idea what the product sounded like before the mod, or rely on a months memory span.

There are some who have openly admitted that they are recommending this companies products PURELY to create revenue for the company.

It is one thing to rave about a product because you are happy, and it is another to outright admit that you are pushing the product, yet have no financial interest in the company itself.

You have a much higher opinion of humanity than I do.

Yes, no doubt.

Speak of the devil.

Unfortunately, when it come to audio or video gear. Garbage products or services, often times get high recommendations.

Sure. Your own personal experience can be considered scientific. Consider it a study with a sample size of one.

As for trusting those who hear differently than you, why would you? You yourself stated they they hear magical differences. If you personally don't hear them, then isn't it obvious your own personal experience would count as your scientific study with a sample size of one to counter their claims?

In this particular thread, you're denying the possibility that these mods have any effect on performance improvement, but you don't have that personal experience with a sample size of one to defend your bias.

I'm not advocating buying what the company is selling, but I can't flat out deny that they're a sham either, without the actual experience of listening to their upgraded versions compared to stock.

In any case, doesn't the company offer a money back guarantee if the mods do not perform any better than your stock unit (at least to your own ears)?

Can't really lose there, other than eating shipping costs.

Btw, I don't buy into the cable mumbo jumbo either, but at least there's some proof that it really is mumbo jumbo.