That's the role I have to play here sometimes being the site adminSomewhat? Were you, per chance, a politician in another life
. You all can go further than I would.
The Upgrade Company
- Thread starter audioguy
- Start date
. You all can go further than I would.
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Somewhat? Were you, per chance, a politician in another life
He hasn't used the term "Cautiously Optimistic" yet. When he does, he's gone over the edge!
The subject of How does it sound? is touchy, since we've all probably read a rave or pan review on a component and found our own impression to be otherwise. Systems vary so much that drawing conclusions without first-hand experience is difficult. However, many of us have "identified" with certain reviewers whose impressions seem to match up with our personal tastes. This corroboration can provide a bit of comfort in assessing the sound quality of a device that we cannot audition ourself.
Objective measurements, on the other hand, are most likely best used to first establish basic electrical/electronic design competency. As we know, many designs can have very similar measurements, but do not behave the same in a playback system.
Submitting gear for review by "visible" reviewers and publications produces both the benchmark electrical measurements AND the opinions of reviewers whose tastes and listening "acuity" with which we have some familiarity. Proprietary procedures, etc. notwithstanding, I believe that the reluctance to submit TUC products for "official review" simply casts an aura of doubt on the company.
I think anybody considering having their gear modified should make the effort to listen carefully to some examples of TUC's work and judge for themselves.
Lee
Objective measurements, on the other hand, are most likely best used to first establish basic electrical/electronic design competency. As we know, many designs can have very similar measurements, but do not behave the same in a playback system.
Submitting gear for review by "visible" reviewers and publications produces both the benchmark electrical measurements AND the opinions of reviewers whose tastes and listening "acuity" with which we have some familiarity. Proprietary procedures, etc. notwithstanding, I believe that the reluctance to submit TUC products for "official review" simply casts an aura of doubt on the company.
I think anybody considering having their gear modified should make the effort to listen carefully to some examples of TUC's work and judge for themselves.
Lee
"How does TUC know that its modified product sounds better?"
"How do I know that TUC modified product sounds better?"
"How do you know that its modified product sounds better?"
Three different questions with three different answers.
TUC know, because they do the mods and listen to the difference.
But how do you know? Well that's much more difficult, and I don't think there's a single, simple answer.
For myself, I'm sceptical of both the usual subjective and objective methods - reviews and measurements.
Reviews, I already banged on about - I don't believe you can completely depend on them.
Measurements - let me talk about measurements. As I said, I used to have a Denon receiver, and it didn't do the job (contrary to ALL the reviews). However, it had superb measurements - power, bandwidth, distortion, decoding, SNR, EQ, IMD - everything. I eventually replaced it with an equivalent flagship receiver from another manufacturer, which was very similar in many ways - functionality, power, weight, cost etc. However, distortion measured typically 0.1% unclipped, instead of 0.01%. A full 20dB difference, and the load tolerance and SNR measurements weren't that great either. Yet the new amp sounded FAR better. So why depend on measurements at all?
After that experience, I continued to read all the tests and reviews out of interest, then largely ignored them. So how to decide what sounds good? Specs? User reviews? Parts used? Tests? Hifi shows? Manufacturers claims? Dealer demos? I don't know the right answer for everyone else - all of them and none of them I suppose.
What I tend to do is buy something, then sell it if I don't like it, but I guess that's not the solution for most people. Its become a bit of an obsessive hobbey, but I do think I've learned to spot the heros from the villains. I know I can't answer everybody's questions, just my own, but I don't suppose yet another subjective testimonial is what this thread needs.
Nick
"How do I know that TUC modified product sounds better?"
"How do you know that its modified product sounds better?"
Three different questions with three different answers.
TUC know, because they do the mods and listen to the difference.
But how do you know? Well that's much more difficult, and I don't think there's a single, simple answer.
For myself, I'm sceptical of both the usual subjective and objective methods - reviews and measurements.
Reviews, I already banged on about - I don't believe you can completely depend on them.
Measurements - let me talk about measurements. As I said, I used to have a Denon receiver, and it didn't do the job (contrary to ALL the reviews). However, it had superb measurements - power, bandwidth, distortion, decoding, SNR, EQ, IMD - everything. I eventually replaced it with an equivalent flagship receiver from another manufacturer, which was very similar in many ways - functionality, power, weight, cost etc. However, distortion measured typically 0.1% unclipped, instead of 0.01%. A full 20dB difference, and the load tolerance and SNR measurements weren't that great either. Yet the new amp sounded FAR better. So why depend on measurements at all?
After that experience, I continued to read all the tests and reviews out of interest, then largely ignored them. So how to decide what sounds good? Specs? User reviews? Parts used? Tests? Hifi shows? Manufacturers claims? Dealer demos? I don't know the right answer for everyone else - all of them and none of them I suppose.
What I tend to do is buy something, then sell it if I don't like it, but I guess that's not the solution for most people. Its become a bit of an obsessive hobbey, but I do think I've learned to spot the heros from the villains. I know I can't answer everybody's questions, just my own, but I don't suppose yet another subjective testimonial is what this thread needs.
Nick
Because we all do in the end, and the instruments used are called ears. They tell us that in one situation the audio performance is better than in another, and therefore there must be a difference in key areas which are of value to the listening experience. There is no magic about it, there is something real to be dealt with here. But the people with access to other, typically expensive, instruments that could pinpoint these behaviour characteristics either refuse to acknowledge that there could be something significant to be measured, or are not really interested in pursuing the analysing of behaviour to what they consider to be esoteric levels, or haven't the time or financial incentives to sufficiently motivate them. So, at the moment, the audio industry is sort of doomed, condemned to advancing the art, in real terms, in minute increments, using seat of the pants methodologies and instinct.
Frank
Last edited:
I'm just happy to see that most folks on this board have a point of diminishing credibility. Like the point of diminishing returns, that line is a bit closer to home for me than it is for most, but we seem to have found one for almost everybody.
Tim
Tim
Speaking of snake oil, this ought to be good for a few yuks:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?accstwek&1305678526&/Kemp-Elektroniks-SR-Plug-schum
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?accstwek&1305678526&/Kemp-Elektroniks-SR-Plug-schum
But, I would put good money on saying that it will have a genuine, audible effect on some people's systems, not all, but some. Obviously not for the reasons presented by the maker, etc, but there will be an impact ...
This is the strange world we inhabit in the audio game, dealing with things that are real, but because of a lack of trying to properly come to grips with them, not really understanding in a rational engineering sense what is going on ...
Frank
This is the strange world we inhabit in the audio game, dealing with things that are real, but because of a lack of trying to properly come to grips with them, not really understanding in a rational engineering sense what is going on ...
Frank
Well,I had a DV9600 done by this GUY and even asked to come pick it up to avoid shipping issues..He says no ...it does not work...it goes to repair shop and they tell me
-About $150(parts and labour) is in it...for $1000
-There is absolutly """NO""" video improvements
-Dave is a nightmare to deal with if things donnot go his way
-Lets not forget the messages he will leave for your family to hear"I am calling the FBI"
So good luck....NOT RECOMMENDED!!!!
Another fine mess you got yourself into TUC
-About $150(parts and labour) is in it...for $1000
-There is absolutly """NO""" video improvements
-Dave is a nightmare to deal with if things donnot go his way
-Lets not forget the messages he will leave for your family to hear"I am calling the FBI"
So good luck....NOT RECOMMENDED!!!!
Another fine mess you got yourself into TUC
What are you talking about?
Those Ferrite plates been out for years! Digikey sells them.
Don't bother him. Perhaps his is not one of the 30+ parts Digikey sells: http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Selection
We have an expression here in the UK: "You can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink". I'm not sure if that translates well to American, but you might get my drift. Users can only say what they know, they can't force people to believe them. There's no actual evidence to support TUC's claims, but then I'd argue that there's little more evidence that anything sounds good.
I first heard about TUC in 2008 from Rich (Naturephoto) who described much the same things written in the TUC testimonials. I then spent many months and emails corresponding with Rich & David S, trying to decide whether something could really be too good to be true. I've become sceptical over the years, and need a good reason to spend my money. There were lots of reasons not to believe the story - why doesn't everyone do it - there are lots of people making similar claims - how do I know the testimonials aren't fabricated, etc. These were big issues for me, just as much they were for everyone else.
However, many people had hotly-debated objections that I had no problem with - the lack of measurements - no credible independent reviews - the secrecy over the modifications themselves, etc. I have little faith in tests or reviews these days, and if David Schulte didn't want to disclose his mods, I didn't care; I was only concerned about the end result. What was probably most convincing was getting in touch with existing customers directly, many of whom were what you might call resourceful and experienced audiophiles, and often they were repeat customers. In private conversation, their stories backed-up the testimonials, and there were two factors I couldn't dismiss - the sheer confidence about that money-back guarantee, and the fact that most TUC customers are repeat business, including me.
I finally bought an upgraded Onkyo 885 processor from TUC two years ago, when I had been listening to a borrowed stock 886 and Lexicon MC-12, and had been struck by the difference between them. I heard many stories about how the TUC Onkyo could beat high-end stereo pre-amps, but I would have been happy for mine to simply match the Lexicon at what it did best. I have what you might call an enquiring AV mind, and have been through a great deal of (increasingly expensive) equipment over the last few years. In particular, I've owned (or at least had extended loans of) the following audio processors:
Emotiva UMC-1
Audiolab 8000AP
Onkyo SC886
TUC Onkyo 885
Arcam AV-9
Lexicon MC-12B
Denon AVP-A1HD
Meridian G68J
Meridian 861V4
Anthem D2v
Proceed AVP-2
The 861 aside for a moment, the TUC Onkyo was clearly the best of all of them, perhaps not enough to blow away the best stereo amps, but still quite an achievement considering the disappointing raw material. In general the better performing processors (the Proceed and 861) had the least functionality, yet the Onkyo had all the interfaces and the processing, yet still mixed it with the best at any price. I didn't own the 885 and the 861 at the same time, so I couldn't do direct comparisons, but I suspect the Onkyo was better with analogue sources and the Meridian better with digital sources. I also compared the TUC Onkyo with an expensive valve pre-amp; can't remember which one, but it was a high-end job with hard-wired components and oil caps and all that. The valve amp was better in the mid-range, but the Onkyo was better at the frequency extremes.
As you can imagine, I was pleasantly surprised by all this, and wanted to put something back into the AV community that I had learned so much from. I wrote it all up and told people what I found. The response was largely the same as in this thread. I even tried loaning my Onkyo to several enthusiasts, but they never even got it out the box, they were always too busy. I was forced to conclude that people just don't want to know about what they can't read in magazines or listen to in shops - perhaps because they don't want to take any sort of risk when spending this much money. I felt that I was taking a big risk at the time, and it really was a very difficult decision the first time round. It got much easier after that, though.
By way of balance, nothing is perfect, and I do have some negative things to say about TUC, but I'll save those for another post, as I've gone on too long.
Nick
I first heard about TUC in 2008 from Rich (Naturephoto) who described much the same things written in the TUC testimonials. I then spent many months and emails corresponding with Rich & David S, trying to decide whether something could really be too good to be true. I've become sceptical over the years, and need a good reason to spend my money. There were lots of reasons not to believe the story - why doesn't everyone do it - there are lots of people making similar claims - how do I know the testimonials aren't fabricated, etc. These were big issues for me, just as much they were for everyone else.
However, many people had hotly-debated objections that I had no problem with - the lack of measurements - no credible independent reviews - the secrecy over the modifications themselves, etc. I have little faith in tests or reviews these days, and if David Schulte didn't want to disclose his mods, I didn't care; I was only concerned about the end result. What was probably most convincing was getting in touch with existing customers directly, many of whom were what you might call resourceful and experienced audiophiles, and often they were repeat customers. In private conversation, their stories backed-up the testimonials, and there were two factors I couldn't dismiss - the sheer confidence about that money-back guarantee, and the fact that most TUC customers are repeat business, including me.
I finally bought an upgraded Onkyo 885 processor from TUC two years ago, when I had been listening to a borrowed stock 886 and Lexicon MC-12, and had been struck by the difference between them. I heard many stories about how the TUC Onkyo could beat high-end stereo pre-amps, but I would have been happy for mine to simply match the Lexicon at what it did best. I have what you might call an enquiring AV mind, and have been through a great deal of (increasingly expensive) equipment over the last few years. In particular, I've owned (or at least had extended loans of) the following audio processors:
Emotiva UMC-1
Audiolab 8000AP
Onkyo SC886
TUC Onkyo 885
Arcam AV-9
Lexicon MC-12B
Denon AVP-A1HD
Meridian G68J
Meridian 861V4
Anthem D2v
Proceed AVP-2
The 861 aside for a moment, the TUC Onkyo was clearly the best of all of them, perhaps not enough to blow away the best stereo amps, but still quite an achievement considering the disappointing raw material. In general the better performing processors (the Proceed and 861) had the least functionality, yet the Onkyo had all the interfaces and the processing, yet still mixed it with the best at any price. I didn't own the 885 and the 861 at the same time, so I couldn't do direct comparisons, but I suspect the Onkyo was better with analogue sources and the Meridian better with digital sources. I also compared the TUC Onkyo with an expensive valve pre-amp; can't remember which one, but it was a high-end job with hard-wired components and oil caps and all that. The valve amp was better in the mid-range, but the Onkyo was better at the frequency extremes.
As you can imagine, I was pleasantly surprised by all this, and wanted to put something back into the AV community that I had learned so much from. I wrote it all up and told people what I found. The response was largely the same as in this thread. I even tried loaning my Onkyo to several enthusiasts, but they never even got it out the box, they were always too busy. I was forced to conclude that people just don't want to know about what they can't read in magazines or listen to in shops - perhaps because they don't want to take any sort of risk when spending this much money. I felt that I was taking a big risk at the time, and it really was a very difficult decision the first time round. It got much easier after that, though.
By way of balance, nothing is perfect, and I do have some negative things to say about TUC, but I'll save those for another post, as I've gone on too long.
Nick
Hi Nick
Its been awhile.
Just got my player back in January 2011(sent for mod on may 24,2009 and now DVD is old news)
All he had to do was let me drive over and pick it up....
But good luck on your quest here?????????
I have read enough of this to see he will never change and everytime my answer system needs redone,I get to hear his soothing voice threating me and my family.
Its been awhile.
Just got my player back in January 2011(sent for mod on may 24,2009 and now DVD is old news)
All he had to do was let me drive over and pick it up....
But good luck on your quest here?????????
I have read enough of this to see he will never change and everytime my answer system needs redone,I get to hear his soothing voice threating me and my family.
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
with all due respect however, how can they listen and formulate an opinion without having heard the unit before the mod was done
This was chewed-over several times in the AVS thread that I can't even bare to read again, but I've forgotten the story now. But yes, its rather an uphill battle. For my part, I've had several products from TUC, and I did have an issue with one of them that's worth repeating. I bought an upgraded Denon 3800 BDP, and when I played that everything worked OK, it was just that it didn't actually sound that good. I called David and left him a message, espressing my disappointment. He called me back quickly, and guess what he said? I can't be serious? What was I doing wrong? Was I imagining it? The rest of my kit can't have been any good?
No, none of that. He immediately offered to send me over a new replacement unit, no questions asked. He didn't even wait for me to return my unit. As it happened, we established between us that there was a wiring fault, which I fixed myself very easily. But my point is that I found TUC's customer support to be quite unparalleled in my experience, and I'm at a loss to explain why your experience was so different to mine.
While I'm at it, I'm with you (and Amir) on the question of HDMI video quality. I've had several TUC players now, and I've never seen any difference in picture quality. Having said that, I never expected to see any improvement, so didn't look very hard. Component video, yes, but HDMI - no. It has surprised me how much TUC have been pushing digital video quality. After my experience with the 3800, I'm more than convinced about the improvements in digital audio quality, but not video.
Nick
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Oh, I did, and a very one-sided encounter it was.
But I wanted someone else to hear it for themselves, rather than have me puff out yet another meaningless, over-enthusiastic user-testimonial.
I also did a blind, level-matched comparison between stock and upgraded Denon 3800BD, but I don't attach as much importance to this as many people. So you can hear a difference from the mods? So what? That doesn't mean the mods are successful, or that you should go buy one.
For modifications to be worthwhile, the improvement must be greater than simply trading-up to better stock equipment. If a $1000 modification improves a $1000 amplifier to the level of a $2000, then its not really successful in my book. Why not just buy the better amplifier, and benefit from the better build quality, reliability and residuals? So the modifications need to take the product higher up the ladder than the cost of the mod itself.
That is what I was trying to find out with such a wide range of pre-pros. I'm very familiar with the stock Onkyo, and although it sounds decent with blu-ray sources, I think it languishes near the bottom of the heap with music/stereo. The upgrades take it pretty much to the top, where you have to pay a lot more money. Therefore the upgrade is worthwhile. I've tried many times to explain why like-for-like comparisons don't tell us what we need to know, and no-one seems to get it. I have higher hopes with this forum.
Nick
But I wanted someone else to hear it for themselves, rather than have me puff out yet another meaningless, over-enthusiastic user-testimonial.
I also did a blind, level-matched comparison between stock and upgraded Denon 3800BD, but I don't attach as much importance to this as many people. So you can hear a difference from the mods? So what? That doesn't mean the mods are successful, or that you should go buy one.
For modifications to be worthwhile, the improvement must be greater than simply trading-up to better stock equipment. If a $1000 modification improves a $1000 amplifier to the level of a $2000, then its not really successful in my book. Why not just buy the better amplifier, and benefit from the better build quality, reliability and residuals? So the modifications need to take the product higher up the ladder than the cost of the mod itself.
That is what I was trying to find out with such a wide range of pre-pros. I'm very familiar with the stock Onkyo, and although it sounds decent with blu-ray sources, I think it languishes near the bottom of the heap with music/stereo. The upgrades take it pretty much to the top, where you have to pay a lot more money. Therefore the upgrade is worthwhile. I've tried many times to explain why like-for-like comparisons don't tell us what we need to know, and no-one seems to get it. I have higher hopes with this forum.
Nick
Similar threads
