How do I verify - or debunk - the claims of The Upgrade Company? - Page 50

Do you provide a 14 day money back guarantee, based upon what I think of any (or no) improvements?

Dave

The person I spoke to (I assume it was DS) did a big dance around the topic before declining to publish anything. Was basically told that I wasn't the kind of customer he was interested in. This was a while back when the previous thread was running.

Regardless, it's TUC's responsibility to validate their claims, and not the job of the consumer to disprove them.

How would TUC handle a return, given that the unit has been physically modified? Do they supply an original, unmodified replacement unit?

How can you even ask such a thing? It should be clear to even the most dimwitted individual (with an advanced degree in hyperspace topology) that there's no comparison in the sound.

You may not have noticed that JD in NJ answered my question in a post previous to yours - definitely kinder than your post.

Dave

Thanks so much! I really appreciate your questions and the manner in which you ask them. Yes, the TV is about 11 years old, and the best it can do is 1080i. For me, CRT has a depth to it that I love. Current flat panels look great, but just don't do it for me. Yes, I have had it calibrated by Lion A/V - Michael Hamilton, and he comes every year or two to do a touchup cal.

Regarding Audyssey, I don't use it. I find that I prefer the sound without it, and this is in a room that I'm sure is not very good at all with regards to acoustics. I did not do any measurements before/after.

Dave

So as a prospective customer, you did exactly what was your prerogative after not getting satisfactory answers from TUC........ you walked with your money and wallet intact. As will others if they are not happy with the product or service offered from TUC.

I appreciate the humor. What I did was make sure that I preferred the upgraded items to my more expensive benchmarks. Otherwise, my plan was to return the items. I have returned items, by the way, because they did not appeal to me, even though I wanted them to.

Dave

I'm just trying to find out if you accept the concept of objective reality. I gave you a definition of it in response to your "what do you mean by objective reality" post. Do you accept that there is objective reality ?

Good question - I do not know.

Dave

Good one! But, I'll have to decline. I prefer the 14 day trial.

Dave

OK, I think it's when you said "existence independent of one's subjective perception of it" - correct? Well, yes, if someone told me that one piece of audio equipment was better than another, I'd be open to that being true, even though I did not yet have any subjective experience with it. However, once I have subjective experience with something, then it's proof positive for me.

Dave

Yes, fortunately I'm a reasonably educated AV consumer. The point being made here is that DS appears to be more than happy selling "snake oil" to those who may not have the background of a typical AVS member.

I'm not touting myself as an expert, but knowledgeable enough to identify claims needing support. I hope it isn't the case, but you seem to be saying it's OK to scam those not knowledgeable enough to ask the right questions.

ORRR....I have an informed opinion of how signals and electronics work and therefore draw a logical conclusion based on the limited information.

Since it's a conclusion, it's not biased and it's only speculative because of the information the seller has chosen to reveal.

Additionally, anyone that has been around long enough to pass puberty should be aware that the world is full of people trying to sell nothing for something. All the periphery associated with what this company offers appears to be smoke and mirrors. All anyone has to do is provide the technical data to support the claims made on the website and the discussion is over.

Bottomline, you apparently view this as there is no evidence so you will accept his claims. I look at this as there is no evidence so I don't believe it's true.

edited for spelling/grammar

The 14 day trial is another variable. It affects the uncertainty principle and potentially influences your decision to hear or not to hear changes. So, maybe you prefer the modded devices for the reassurance of the 14 day trial, not for the actual modifications.

AJ

That's not what I'm saying at all. Read the post again. And if you are not an "expert", than your characterization of TUC's products as "snake oil" without so much as having bench tested them or listened to them is biased and speculative.

I'll take that that as a yes, that you do accept the concept of objective reality. Do you accept the fact that people can and do perceive things that aren't objectively real?

I certainly do not accept his claims. But I certainly won't make the "conclusion" that's not "biased" that you did.

Careful guys - I don't believe these kinds of comments are allowed, via the forum rules (below) - and I'm sure we don't want the moderator to shut things down:

'You agree not to use this forum to accuse anyone, any company or any product of being "stupid" or a "fraud" or to use a term like "snake oil" to describe a particular product, as such terms may be viewed as defamatory and abusive.'

Dave

What do you think about his claims?

Absolutely! Happens every day.

Dave

It doesn't matter what I think about TUC. What matters is what's verifiable on a test bench and what the customers who have spent their money on TUC's products say after owning and evaluating the component.

If someone handed you a pill, told you it was perfectly safe to take - including no side-effects, and it cured all of your problems, would you feel differently if you discovered after taking it for some time that it was nothing more than a sugar pill?

I'd prefer to answer questions about audio - thanks.

Dave

I'm not sure what part of "validating TUC's claims is the requirement of TUC" I'm not succeeding in communicating...

Post some measurements though, and prove me wrong.

That's right, on these boards, I'm an informed hobbyist, but not an expert. Within the general population, a lot of us would be considered AV experts, but at least I'm honest about it and see where my knowledge level fits on AVS. That said, the only "expert" in what TUC does is DS and he refuses to answer any legitimate questions. The majority of the rest of us are knowledgeable enough to spot unsupported marketing claims when they arise.

BTW, are you claiming to be an expert?

Fair enough - I won't edit the original since it's already been replied to, but will refrain from using inflammatory terminology going forward.

I didn't intend to ask what you thought about TUC. I am asking what you think about his claims. Do you believe that shielding is necessary and provides an improvement in SQ? Do you believe that it's necessary to replace internal wiring? Do you believe that aluminum conductors alter the sound performance of a component?

What customers have to say about the improvements is subjective and therefore mostly irrelevant in this particular application.

I didn't say you were "wrong". Read the post again.

I believe the published results of verifiable bench testing.

If you want to dismiss what TUC's customers have to say without knowing of their testing procedures, that is up to you. You obviously are making assumptions based on a preconceived bias. I am not.

I'm not always successful at being polite. This must be my good week! I recognize your like for RPTV and if I had one that I'd paid good money for, I'd be loathe to toss it aside.

If you're not predisposed to using room correction, I'd have thought you might have considered buying a receiver, maybe something like an older multichannel Rotel or NAD just as an example. I don't know what your room is like but if your room has severe issues, I think looking to address those would yield significant benefits. Further, and this is pure speculation on my part (well maybe not entirely speculative), looking to evaluate audible differences in such an environment can be quite challenging leading one to attribute assessments incorrectly. To my way of thinking based on what you've said, it's not your equipment that is a limiting factor rather it's the environment they're in.

Measurements, had they been performed, would've been able to shed some light on the bass as well as other aspects of your overall setup.