All the more reason that I find it surprising that you never heard of The Upgrade Company before today, as he is a fairly well known commodity especially to those who were interested in modifying cd/sacd players in the 00's.
Then again, judging by all the posts today, well, a lot of eyes got opened.
Yes, if you don't know what accuracy in perceptual terms, means (& this is what is being perceived) & you try to measure accuracy solely using the limited engineer's definition of accuracy then these measurements can certainly lead you astray.
It's a pity you are one of the know-it-alls who are beyond learning anything new & everything you see posted is interpreted by you in your own limited perspective.
I guess, you take comfort that you are not alone on here
If you use opamps, then yes, RF is bad with feedback circuits - so I would get rid of them in all digital players/DACs.
I note on his website he does the Oppo 205, so if the treatment is not about re-engineering and only RF/EMI, then the work I do on the Oppo 205 is the exact opposite, I fit eight modules of which seven are actual PB Boards (a bit of a tight fit, but it does) of original design. The entire post-DAC circuit is replaced with a zero feedback transconductance circuit - no opamps. I also (and this has gotten me into trouble in the past) use a 3rd order passive post-DAC filter (includes actual inductors and capacitors) before I/V takes place, some angry folks here will recall that. The clocking is rather extreme, both the Master Clock on the MediaTek chip and the ESS Sabre DAC chip. These are not bought in and fitted, they are our design and includes an analog buffering of clock signals/inputs. I would love to do a comparison because this is about as opposite approach to upgrading as it gets. Also a lot of work.
Last edited:
I will give you the benefit of the doubt, and presume you are attacking my post and not me personally, can you explain how measurements may lead us astray?
Yes, it should have read "classic idiotic post" - there, amended now 😉
If you read my post above my "classic idiotic post" & you have questions that show you have read & understood what I said, I may be able to help you further - if not, I won't waste my time
I don't understand what you mean by "you try to measure accuracy solely using the limited engineer's definition of accuracy then these measurements can certainly lead you astray" so I'm guessing you don't consider my question worthy of an answer?
I read some of the website RF page & he seems to contend that RF signals being handled by ICs cause a drain on the PS which reduces the power available for the actual signal processing & reduced dynamics results? When a device oscillates due to RF handling then this is very much obvious as overheating of IC & eventual failure of active component so what about a level of RF that doesn't cause this oscillation - is it just benign? He says not, what are others view on this?
Sure I recall that controversy - seems that some of the same actors were involved in your attempted pillorying as we see here?
Are your effort snot also addressing mitigation of the effects of RF - by removing feedback based active circuitry & also filtering out RF (out of band noise) at DAC's output before active IV stage.
As always there are many ways to address the same issue - kill it at source and/or ensure downstream components are less sensitive to RFI
Yes, it would be interesting as it may point to the same underlying mechanism at work?
So you call FUD on things you don't understand, rather than ask sensible questions?
This is part of the problem I have with you - you just shoot off your posts without care or thought - just top of the head stuff & no attempt at trying to understand - usually thoughtless inanities.
If you showed that you had done some thinking before your question I might be inclined to answer but until you do I won't waste my time answering your well recognised modus operandii leading down a rabbit hole
HI Joe,
I'm not all that knowledgeable on specifics of what Upgrade Company used to do, and certainly don't now. However, in the 00's he was all about replacing passive electrical parts in players and then adding some damping materials. He did specifically used to state that he didn't replace stock clocks with aftermarket clocks.
When I visited his exhibit room in 2006 he had a popular Denon universal player stock and with his work, as well as the Meitner player of the day, stock and with his work. It was not hard to hear the difference between stock and Upgrade company players.
I'm from the same school of thought as You and Allen in that parts swapping doesn't do much. So whatever David Schulte did beyond parts swapping, it worked.
I had not looked at The Upgrade Company website in years until today. I didn't even know it was still around until I read Richard's post a couple days ago. The modifying business is not now what it was in the 00's.
BTW, I'm very well aware of your work from your website, your showing at Melbourne Audio Club a couple years ago, and having your Terra Firma clock in my current player.
"Yes, it would be interesting as it may point to the same underlying mechanism at work?"
Anybody care to speculate what the deeper underlying mechanism at work might be?
Mitigating/attenuating RF is too high a level - is it ground reference stability that is at a lower level technically - is it noise floor modulation (I know this is related to & probably a higher level result of ground ref stability) - is it just starvation of power from the dynamic requirements needed when processing signals which have a wide dynamic range - is it accuracy of the timing that is fundamentally improved - is it all of these things - any other possibilities not just related to RF ?
Anybody care to speculate what the deeper underlying mechanism at work might be?
Mitigating/attenuating RF is too high a level - is it ground reference stability that is at a lower level technically - is it noise floor modulation (I know this is related to & probably a higher level result of ground ref stability) - is it just starvation of power from the dynamic requirements needed when processing signals which have a wide dynamic range - is it accuracy of the timing that is fundamentally improved - is it all of these things - any other possibilities not just related to RF ?
Last edited:
He calls FUD quite often, doesn't know enought to ask sensible and leading questions.
SJ you might think you are the 'class clown' interjecting constantly, that your inputs are in someway humorous.
Please see it from others' POV that this behaviour of yours of constant interruption and clogging of the forum encourages the like minded to do the same and amounts to an incredibly selfish waste of other members time.
Also please consider that while you keep interrupting, sensible and educational posts get lost and good opportunities for advancement are squandered......your selfish attention seeking behaviour would not be tolerated in the household or the workplace, please stop bringing it here.
Yes he repeatedly is not interested in answers, this thread is his primary form of 'entertainment' it seems.
SJ enough is enough, most of us have had a gutfull of your nonsense, please tone it down or take a holiday from this forum for for a while, the forum and you will both be better for you doing so.
Dan, if you find my questioning of things like "measurements can lead us astray" and me calling such assertions FUD offends your sensibilities, why don't you just ignore me?
He does mention multi-layer shielding around looms/cables and shielding including on processors/chips.
I suspect he might be using some funky ingredients......we will await Marks review and photo report.
Dan.
I don't understand why you don't answer my simple question about your assertion that measurements can lead us astray, do you not consider it a sensible question?
Sure. Widespread marketing trick, publish every measurement except the important factor and give it catchy soundbites like "High Fidelity" and "Low Distortion". Applicable only to the subsystem but meaningless to the total chain and experience of the listener. Usual garden variety bollocks. 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.