How do I verify - or debunk - the claims of The Upgrade Company? - Page 49

[quote=Bill Mac;21948534]
Hi Bill,

Great questions and suggestions for testing. On the subjective side, which is what I prefer, I had benchmark(s) for comparison. The benchmarks were not a stock units - they were more expensive units of another brand. After all, I don't want to just improve on the stock unit, I want the upgraded unit to be better than units costing more $$$. I compared stock to the benchmark and then compared upgraded to the benchmark. This testing was done subjectively, and fully satisfies my criteria.

With regards to objective testing, I think your suggestions are good ones. For me, unless I'm involved in a blind test of some sort, I don't fully trust the data from other blind tests. There's still a human factor involved, and other folks' preferences may differ from mine. I would also not want a switch dropped in - an unknown variable.


Dave

Thanks, Dave. What did the TUC modded units do that the stock ones didn't?

Correct. There is no "pre or post performance specifications" available, which makes your conclusion biased and speculative.

Hi Nick,

I agree on your first point - I want the best gear for my hard earned money, and I'd let David know if I liked something better. I do like Dave, but he has earned that through his terrific service and support and how kind he has been. The only correction on my gear is that I had the Marantz AV8003 and not the AV7005. I do have a stock AV7005 in my system right now.

Dave

For me, I would prefer a DBT with manual cable swapping, in my home and with my gear, if I had to do a DBT. Of course, for my needs, it's not necessary - subjective listening is proof enough for me.


Dave

"for my needs, it's not necessary" sounds like you would never participate in such a test under the stated conditions, because you've already decided that TUC's claims are valid, and would not want to risk being shown otherwise. This is different from Jeff's approach. He wanted verification of the validity of their claims.

BDP-05FD - when upgraded and after a week of running it 24X7, the colors were as saturated as my benchmark unit and yet a sharper image (but not overly sharp). For audio, it was a smoother and more liquid sound that retained the detail - similar to the benchmark, with perhaps a tad more detail.

5508 - compared to the benchmark, it's a clearer (for lack of a better word) sound, but not bright. Smoother and more liquid again. Bass is not bloated.

AV8003 - I did not have a stock version, but compared to the stock AV7005, it's much clearer, much less bass bloat.

Dave

To come to these determinations, did you make the same comparisons with the benchmark unit prior to modification of the 05FD? What video output did you utilize -- component or HDMI?

AJ

Yes, you are correct. For my needs, these tests are unnecessary. For folks like Jeff, they want a different verification/validity of the claims. I understand that, and I'm not trying to convince them away from their efforts, and I'm not trying to convince them to be convinced the way I am convinced. I only wish they would not introduce unknown variables. I also think it wise to caution folks to do their own blind tests, if possible, and not fully rely upon the preferences of others in a blind test.

Dave

Absolutely. And as Chu said earlier, if you really wanted to cripple the test, go for a manual cable swap every time!

Great question AJ! Yes, I did make these comparisons with the 05FD prior to the modifications. These comparisons were made with component video, for both the 05FD and the benchmark unit, because my Pioneer Elite Pro-710HD TV does not have an HDMI or DVI input.

Dave

Spoken like a true subjectivist. "The only reality that matters to me is that which I subjectively perceive, and objective reality does not exist".

Mostly true... I admit that the only thing that matters to me is what I subjectively perceive, and when doing a blind test it again comes down to what I subjectively perceive. If a blind test is considered objective, then I guess I'm still subjective, even when it's objective.

Dave

So it doesn't matter to you if the differences are objectively real, as long as you subjectively believe they exist.

A blind test is not objective, it just removes your ability to express preferences based on knowing what piece of hardware is being tested. This allows you to focus on what you and most of us consider important, which is how pleasing the sound is to our ears. Sometimes we fool ourselves, and I prefer not to be a fool whenever possible.

While we are on the subject of isolating variables, how did you deliver your devices to be modded to David Schulte, and how did he return them to you? If you used shipping methods, have you allowed for the possibility that the travails of shipping -- mechanical disturbances, extreme temperatures, cosmic and/or x-rays -- and not necessarily the modifications themselves could be in part or in whole the cause of the changes in the modified devices?

AJ

It is not a variable. It is a fixed parameter as the only variables are the DUTs. Any objection you have to that parameter is a different matter. Words matter.

Not sure - depends upon what you mean by objectively real - how would that be determined?

Dave

Hmmmm - i wonder why TUC doesn't post these. If they indicated an improvement, this conversation would end immediately and TUC would likely see numerous orders for gear.

As stated before, extraordinary claims require proof from those making the claim. Without that evidence, one can only assume the claims are unsupportable.

Sounds to me like we agree. And, some folks are fooled into thinking certain things, as you mentioned. For audio, that doesn't happen for me. I've decided against many things that I really wanted to be better, but I'm a little to honest with myself, especially when it comes to spending my hard earned money.

Dave

One example would be to use REW or similar software to analyze in detail the waveforms being produced by both devices in otherwise identical signal chains. That would give objective proof that there is (or isn't) a difference in the output from the two. The subjective part comes into play when you have to decide for yourself whether or not you can actually hear any such differences, and which version is more pleasing.

Wow, I have not allowed for that. Perhaps I should send out the rest of my (unmodified) equipment and just have it shipped back.

Dave

You are correct then. Measurements don't matter to me - it's the sound that matters to me. I realize and respect that others feel differently.

Dave

Are you familiar with the concept of objective reality at all, ie existence independent of one's subjective perception of it? Or is that concept meaningless and foreign to you?

This sounds like a business opportunity. Ship me any devices you wish to undergo shipment burn-in, and I will ship them back for a low low price.

Do you not mind even if you have paid thousands of dollars for an alleged difference that isn't actually real?

Are you saying that so long as a difference exists in your mind, then you have been given good value for those dollars?

Thanks again, Dave. I'm not looking to be confrontational by asking you questions, so I hope you'll bear with me.

I seem to recall that's an older rear projection TV and not an especially small one at that. Since as you say you're looking for maximum performance, is there any way to have the TV display 1080p resolution? If not, why not sell or move it somewhere else and get one that's more capable?

Has the TV ever been calibrated either by yourself or using a service? Along those lines, do you have any calibration discs where you could evaluate test patterns?

WRT the processor, you say the bass now is less bloated. I assume you're using the Audyssey features. Did you run any FR sweeps of your system before and after as well as compare the settings that were made?

Well, a bit of blue gloop and tinfoil aside, isn't that what you did?

(Sorry - a cheap shot but I couldn't resist it).

You can assume that. What did TUC say when you called them to ask to post their specifications?

You have no evidence that the differences aren't real (except your own preconceived notions). His evidence is ownership of a product that he deems worthy of his hard earned dollars due to tests he has conducted, to his satisfaction, in his own home.