The Upgrade Company

[mep]

Anyone who is in the business of modifying gear and who won't disclose to you what they are modifying before you shell out your cash can't be trusted-pure and simple. I know of no company in the mod business who doesn't disclose exactly what parts they are replacing and exactly what it is your money is paying for. This whole attitude of secrecy and accusing you of theft of intellectual property because you want to know what your money is buying before you pay is a ruse. You need to keep one hand on your wallet and the other one over your butt.

I'm not buying the secret nuclear work for the government over a proxy server either. I work for the government and I understand a thing or two about how our classified computer networks operate. We don't have civilians performing classified nuclear work over a proxy server. This type of work has to be done in a secure area on a secure network that meets DoD standards. It is very expensive to set up these type of networks, the rooms they are set up in, and to maintain them. This doesn't even take into account the cost of providing for the physical security of the facililty. That is why this type of work is done by the big boy contractors (think of companies like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon for example). It also takes highly skilled computer software people just to perform the scans and software pushes that must done on a routine basis. Classified nuclear work isn't being peformed by Bob's Blue Goo and Tin Foil Mod Shop.

The things that microstrip is referring to is really associated with having electronics withstand an EMP.

 

[amirm]

Based on the information provided here, this is where I net out:

1. It doesn't seem David has engineering design experience (or else he would have been able to answer my questions regarding HDMI and know what material protects against RFI).

2. He doesn't have schematic or architectural design documents for the devices he modifies. As such, the nature of his changes are at component level, not system.

3. Given the above, the only way then to make changes is to look at a part and see if there is one with better specs and swap it out for that. Indeed, this is the point David makes over and over again.

4. Component changes can lead to audio changes. Assuming he knows what is really an improved part vs not, then it is possible that improvements can occur.

5. His work can be potentially dangerous: lack of schematics and design expertise could lead to safety issues. Let's look at an analogy. The propeller in an outboard boat engine has a "cotter pin" which locks it to the transmission shaft. It is made out of soft material so that if the prop hits something hard, the pin shears rather than tearing up the entire transmission. If one doesn't know about it, then you are liable to wonder why such soft and "cheap" metal pin was used and drive a hard screw in there with disastrous results.

By the same token, power supply and output circuits in amplifiers have sacrificial components that are designed to self destruct in certain conditions. Changing them or other parts which would impact the current seen by these parts may result in risk of fire. In schematics, these are parts are clearly marked and specified to be replaced with exact replacements. Comments from EMM labs seem to indicate this company have changed parts that could cause safety issues in the power supply. David disputes this which is fine but having dealt with these circuits a lot, I worry .

4. It is super risky to send equipment still under warranty to be upgraded this way. TUC does not warranty basic operation of the machine I imagine. Yet there is no way to separate failures in the machine vs ones caused by the modifications. What's worse, TUC is in no position to properly troubleshoot system failures -- again due to lack of expertise and design documentations. With today's complex products, this is a risky venture. To the extent you can throw away the box should it fail, then no big deal. But if you are dealing with expensive gear, this should give you pause.

5. Money-back guarantee doesn't have the value it normally has. Once the machine is touched, you are in no-man's land as far as repairing the gear as the unhappy customer explained. He had to pay for all parts to be returned back to factory condition before repairs were done.

So I would say you have a random chance of audio improvement on one side, and a heap of risks on the other. Surely there are options that optimize these factors better. No?

 

[naturephoto1]

Maybe I am the exception, but of the 16 machines that I have had upgraded by the Upgrade Company, only 1 (of the 12 of the 16 machines that I still posses) have failed under manufacturer warranty. All of the other machines that I have or had are still working without issue, some of which (amps) were worked on over 3 years ago and the others have been worked on from about 1 to 3 years ago.

Rich

 

[RBFC]

I wonder what would happen if a customer asked to watch the modifications being made to his component while the chassis is open. He would then have no need to open the cover once he left with the upgraded component. I've walked through Krell and seen all the cheap parts being thrown into their amps......

Lee

 

[amirm]

I've walked through Krell and seen all the cheap parts being thrown into their amps......

Lee

Nothing but cheap parts is right:

 

[RUR]

I'm not buying the secret nuclear work for the government over a proxy server either. I work for the government and I understand a thing or two about how our classified computer networks operate. We don't have civilians performing classified nuclear work over a proxy server. This type of work has to be done in a secure area on a secure network that meets DoD standards. It is very expensive to set up these type of networks, the rooms they are set up in, and to maintain them. This doesn't even take into account the cost of providing for the physical security of the facililty. That is why this type of work is done by the big boy contractors (think of companies like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon for example). It also takes highly skilled computer software people just to perform the scans and software pushes that must done on a routine basis. Classified nuclear work isn't being peformed by Bob's Blue Goo and Tin Foil Mod Shop.

Roger that. Worked at one of the big 3 A&D companies for 30+ years before I retired. Classified work is done on TEMPEST computers behind multiple-firewalls and such computers most certainly do not have internet access. There are a number of other precautions. Also, stating that you perform DoD classified work outside of the workplace is a big no-no. Hell, I was admonished by a federal agent (can't remember the agency) at a carwash one day simply because I had forgotten to take my badge off. :-(

 

[audioguy]

Well, based upon those who have direct experience with government secret projects, it appears Mr. TUC has (surprise) stretched the truth just a tad. Couple that with his refusal to answer specific technical questions after repeated requests, his "secret" upgrades, his "super friendly" demeanor on this forum (and elsewhere) he just exudes trustworthyness and other character traits that I'm sure will endear him to potential customers.

Tough to hide in the Internet world!!

 

[amirm]

Once again, Since the OP said "Never mind. I just found some info on another site. Won't be doing business withhis guy!!!"

Thread owners start a thread, they don't control where it goes. That is how social media works. It is the ultimate instantiation of democracy!

Please me tell how this thread served the mission of What's Best In Audio?

Given the compliments I have received privately in bringing to the surface the merits of the services by your company, I say it has served a valuable purpose. We established a lot that wasn't covered elsewhere. The discussion was without name calling, fact-based, and dare I say fun in some strange way.

Besides, to know what is the best, sometimes you have to know what is not!

BTW, do you agree with the OP's conclusion to not work with your company?

 

[amirm]

You're not a good detective.

My detector is saying you are using a proxy server to hide your identity. When I asked this question last, TUC owner answered on your behalf .

Please re-login without it or risk having your membership revoked.

 

[DaveyF]

This is another very interesting thread.
If for no other reason than the fact that some of the less scrupulous vendors that
are now plying their wares in the audio industry might realize that with 'Forums' like
this; that these same vendors will ultimately be "outted" to the public.
Bravo to you Amir, for bringing this company and its now obvious lack of ethics to the attention of
the membership.
BTW, please do enlighten us further...Krell innards??? As a non-techno consumer, I for one would
like to understand further your comments on 'cheap parts' in the Krell line.

 

[RBFC]

BTW, please do enlighten us further...Krell innards??? As a non-techno consumer, I for one would
like to understand further your comments on 'cheap parts' in the Krell line.

Amir and I were joking. The parts inside a Krell amplifier are first rate.

Lee

 

[RUR]

As in all things it is a matter of balance and particular parts quality and really understanding electronic devices.

Precisely, which is why I find it interesting that someone with zero formal engineering education, EE or any other discipliine, is second-guessing the work of, for example, guys like this:

Daniel Weiss, President, graduated in 1979 with a BSEE from the HTL Rapperswil. Joined the Studer Revox company in 1979 as an Electronics Engineer. There he worked on analog anti-aliasing filters, test signal generators, sampling frequency converters and digital audio processing for a two channel DASH recorder. He left Studer in 1984 to start the Weiss Engineering company.

Uli Franke, Electronics Engineer, graduated in 2004 from the ETH in Zurich with an MS degree in Electrical Engineering.

Rolf Anderegg, Electronics Engineer, graduated in 2004 from the ETH in Zurich with an MS degree in Electrical Engineering.

Samuel Groner, Electronics Engineer,
graduated in 2006 from the ETH in Zurich with an MS degree in computer science and 2010 from the ZHdK (Zurich University of the Arts) with an MA degree in recording engineering.

http://www.weiss.ch/history.html

We know he has modded Weiss product from the AVS thread.

 

[Gregadd]

I do agree with TUC on one thing. There are a lot of high priced products using garden variety parts. If high priced parts are not required then the price should reflect that. Here is an example of first class construction.
http://www.firstsoundaudio.com/technical.html

 

[amirm]

Once again I have nothing to do with TUC, and never asked him to answer on my behalf. Please reread those posts and check the source IPs.

Reveal your proper IP address and we will verify. But as long as you want to stay masked, you can't use that defense. See more below.

Where in your rules does it say that you can't use a proxy server?

Our rules say that you cannot use multiple logins to access the forum. Use of proxy is the main mechanism to circumvent that rule. If you are not using multiple logins, show that by using the forum without the proxy. If you do not, we will have to assume that our suspicions are right.

 

[RUR]

There are a lot of high priced products using garden variety parts.

Sure, but in a competitive world, which is, BTW, the same world in which TUC exists, a good circuit designer will use the most cost-effective parts obtainable which meet the project design goals. Those goals are typically many and varied, but definitely include the output characteristics of the finished product.

As Mr. S doesn't believe in measurements as an indicator of finished product AQ, I do wonder how he selects his replacement parts, since the obvious method for doing so is based on..........measurements. If only he'd respond to posts 45/50, we might actually know.

Having said this, sales channel costs and profit margins for some/all high-end gear is another discussion, entirely.

 

[amirm]

I think to be fair to TUC and other modders, there are reasons why something can be modified in the hopes of improvement:

1. Modders do not have their hands tied relative to regulatory issues. They can modify parts and not worry if that increases radiation energy and as such, fail FCC tests. They can modify parts not worrying about impacting UL/CSA safety issues. These are concerns for real manufacturers and should be that of consumers although the former has no choice in the matter.

2. Modders do not have to anticipate long term reliability issues. The previously given example of changing power supply cap may be undue load on the power supply regulator. This may not be obvious in short or even medium term use. As long as the box works, they can ship it to the customer.

3. Circuit designers have to design with safety margin and good production yield. A typical part may have variations of +-30% so a circuit may have to tolerate the worst case scenarios of a lot of parts. Modders don't have to worry about it.

4. Companies want to limit their suppliers to as few as possible as to get better pricing on components. So they may forgo a part that requires a relationship with a new vendor just for that one part.

5. Modders can modify parts which have absolutely no impact on performance. The designer knows this through knowledge, comparative testing and circuit simulation. Modder does not have these options typically.

6. They can take advantage of newer parts that didn't exist when the equipment was designed.

7. TUC was right about this being a business ultimately. Parts could have been chosen to reduce costs even in high dollar equipment.

 

[Steve williams]

what I have learned from this thread is, as I posted before, "caveat emptor"

There are obviously several members here who are quite happy with the upgrade path that they have followed with TUC. Having said this however,and having read the countless posts by the CEO of TUC, I find his posture, demeanor and a "my way or the highway" attitude to be beyond incredible and for my money, even if I were to ever mod a piece of equipment it would never be with this company, for fear I would ask the wrong question and be fired by David as a customer

Further as RUR points out the credentials of this individual leaves much to be desired re any knowledgeable idea as to which parts should be modded. Amir also makes strong arguments that the parts used by this company could potentially introduce hazardous conditions inasmuch as circuits could be compromised. Finally IMO the strongest point is also made by Amir wherein, should something fail in the equipment unrelated to the mod, the owner is left in a quandry as only TUC can open the box because if the owner were to do so, he voids TUC warranty BUT if it is a failure in the original components,the manufacturer will never honor the warranty because of the mods having been done.

It is also interesting how the strength of online testimonials can serve to ad fuel to the fire of this business model

Finally, I must admit that I only heard of this company through earlier posts by some members here so when I returned from vacation and saw this thread I read it from start to finish with great interest. Until I read this thread my mind was open but when I read the arrogant and demeaning posture of this CEO, I knew that even "if" there was anything right about this company that would make me consider a mod, it would never be with this company. Finally, to read such bold statements that this CEO uses a proxy server because he works with a secure computer and is doing research for the DoD is absolute poppycock.I was intrigued with his research in the use of Helium3 in the conversion to electricity but was also fascinated that the bulk of He3 is located on the moon.

There is just so much that one (me) can take and when all is said and done, at the end of the day, even with his acclaimed A+ BBB rating, I will say again, that for my money i would never cozy up with this company and allow them to carry out clandestine mods of the gear that I spent my hard earned money on.

 

[DaveyF]

Amir and I were joking. The parts inside a Krell amplifier are first rate.

Lee

Lee, you guys had me worried there for a moment....Many moons ago, I owned a Krell Ksa 50...which I thought, naively, was built like a 'brick house'.
A great sounding amp also ( should never had sold it.. ). So your comment was a little surprising..
OTOH, parts quality is probably a relevant term..especially in today's world of $16K caps

 

[JackD201]

A 16 grand cap? Does it do 1.21 Jiggawatts?

 

[mimesis]

I just want to add one last thing about the gross simplification many modders make - that if a part is cheap it must be bad. From this tenuous assumption, TUC then infers that the manufacturer is trying to rip the customer off. As pointed out earlier, we have adopted a capitalistic market economy that assumes competition and incentivizes development by allowing profit-seeking. Given that consumers and competitors can buy products and rip them apart and point out the flaws, it makes sense that as this information circulates, demand for said product will drop or there will be price pressure given that there may be entrants into the market segment seeking to exploit this arbitrage situation. But to follow up on the cheap parts = crap assumption, if there is a design spec that models fixed parameters perhaps a given part is the best part for those specs and putting in more expensive parts is a complete waste. I like to think of another expensive pursuit (which I do not indulge), car racing. As a fan of Formula One, I marvel at the technology in the cars. I can't imagine that engineers think they would put in the most expensive identical part and assume the car will be better.

This is why I personally tend to favor manufacturers, however, small, who have a vision and attempt to implement it in their design and then produce it. When I read interviews with people who have a systematic approach and products in the field (I'm thinking of Spectral and Lamm in particular) I feel I am buying into that designer's vision. They see the whole elephant for what it is and consider each part and yes, as a business they price the product to fit their supply model (acceptable gross profit per unit x units sold given the demand and the competition) and hoped for return. Those without the schematics or design simply see a part and mistakenly think they see the whole.

William

PS I'd also add that without a system approach or a database of modifications indexed for part, circuit and place in the circuit correlated to statistically significant listening trials (could be the same person over time as long as the conditions are controlled) any change seems to be haphazard trial and error, a scenario which heightens the possibility of expectation bias - whatever I did, because it was the bestest part (and egotistically speaking, because I did it) must be great.