Tice R-4 TPT & Coherence ElectroTec EP-C "Clocks" Letters about the Tice Clock

Letters about the Tice Clock appeared in March 1991 (Vol.14 No.3):

Tice attacked

Editor: There follows a letter I wrote to George Tice:

Dear Mr. Tice:

After trying the model R-4 TPT clock in my system, I have returned the unit for refund. I have done this because the increase in performance did not match the dollar investment made in the clock. More improvement has been gained in my system by making simple tweaks that cost nothing, or were low in cost.

But the thing that upset me the most was instruction #4 on your instruction sheet. It reads:

"4) If you are encountering difficulties focusing in on changes made by TPT it is advisable that you try using two Clocks. Two Clocks will give twice the effect. Two Clocks will further outline the differences, making them easier to discern later when you listen with one Clock."

If two clocks give twice the effect, why did you not design the clock that way to start with, or offer another model that would give this increased performance at a reasonable price? Maybe this way two clocks can be sold; maybe ten clocks sound better than two.

This subject of price gets down to the real point I would like to make. The high end seems to be moving toward high-price ripoff!! What does this clock cost to produce? What technology does it offer? The underground mags say there is no extra circuitry involved, that the clock has been "treated," yet the Audio Advisor ad (where the clock was purchased) states there is a microchip installed. What is true? Maybe witchcraft is involved!

I would like to hear from you about this matter. I am sending copies of this letter to The Absolute Sound and Stereophile. —Jack Roberts, N. Myrtle Beach, SC

Tice defended

Editor: Should you publish Mr. Roberts's letter, we respectfully request that you also publish this response:

Dear Mr. Roberts:

We received your letter today and, to say the least, found it quite insulting. I will, however, out of courtesy to you, respond to it.

From the opening of your letter it is obvious that the TPT Clock did improve your system. You feel, however, that the dollar investment did not match the performance you hoped to get. You should be aware that there are no scales by which an improvement-per-dollar assessment can be made. It is largely dependent upon your own personal taste, hearing ability, and the quality of your system.

There are four reasons why someone could not get the full potential from a TPT Clock. They are: 1) You did not follow the directions. 2) There are one or more choke points in your system (a choke point is a component which is significantly below the quality of the rest of the system). 3) Your audio system is not up to the standards by which anything can be accurately judged. (I noticed in your letter you never mentioned what components you use.) 4) Your hearing ability is not as refined as that of other music lovers and audiophiles.

As to your point regarding other simple tweaks giving you more of an improvement: No other tweak you can do will eliminate electron noise on the power line.

Relating to your major concern regarding instruction #4, suggesting the use of two Clocks when you have a difficult time hearing one, some explanation is in order. Nowhere in any of our literature will you find Tice Audio suggesting that it is necessary to buy two Clocks. We suggested auditioning two Clocks in an effort to help those whose systems and hearing capabilities are not as refined as they should be to be able to focus on the improvements gained through the use of one Clock. Regarding your assertion that we are holding back the full treatment strength, you are again wrong.

We have already had many customers indicate their feeling that our TPT Clock was too powerful. This is evidenced by the fact that we have indicated in the updated Clock instruction sheet a method of reducing the power of the TPT Clock and thereby reducing its effect on your system.

Your accusation that we purposely held back processing of the Clocks to force consumers to buy two, three, or ten, as you suggest, is quite frankly an insult of the lowest order. It is not technically possible to make one Clock as strong as two. We take pride in offering high-quality products at a fair market price. Before we would lower ourselves to "ripoff" schemes, we would just as soon resign from audio and close our shop.

I think before you condemn a large part of the high-end manufacturing industry, you should tell me what your qualifications are to make this assessment. Having been involved in audio for 32 years, I can tell you quite frankly that I do not know more than two or three people in the entire business that are really making big money. I do know many people who have sacrificed their homes, life savings, and, unfortunately in too many cases, their marriages, in an effort to follow their dreams.

Please feel free to call me any time and I will be more than happy to outline the costs of producing quality products and running a business in America. Since you are making the assertion that our Clock and many other high-end products are "ripoffs," I would like you to tell me how much money we have invested into research and development of the TPT process and what was the cost of developing our processing machines, not to mention the thousands of hours of my own personal time spent working on this project?

Since you are using the word ripoff, according to Webster's Dictionary this is defined as "a means of cheating, stealing, robbing, or exploiting." Who put a gun to your head to force you to buy our products? I would suggest you use your words more carefully. As your own letter actually indicates, no one has ripped you off; your money was refunded.

I am a firm believer in the American capitalist system. I have a right to price my products as high or as low as I deem necessary. I have a right to recoup the money and time I have invested in a product or technology; I also have to face the consequences when we invest money in a project that does not fly. This is the American way. You, the consumer, have the right to respond by buying or not buying our products. If I price our products too high, then I will soon find my company out of business. On the other hand, if I price our products too low, the end result is still the same. You must realize that audio is an expensive hobby. You should not be angry with audio manufacturers because you cannot afford to buy their products. You should perhaps look inward to ask yourself, "Why can't I afford the things I want in life?"

Regarding your question "What technology does the Clock offer?": TPT is a material treatment system which, when integrated with other systems—ie, your electrical system—eliminates electron noise caused by the random and chaotic movement of electrons in a conductor. We will have a white paper explaining this process in further detail available by the time you receive this letter.

Regarding your comments on extra circuitry, no extra circuits have been added to the Clock. The Clock is only a carrier of the TPT technology. I realize this is a difficult concept for some people to grasp: the Clock has been treated with the TPT process. This is very much the same idea as cryogenically treating components. Those components are not visually modified or altered, but the treatment changes them on a molecular level. The same is true for our TPT process. As to the Audio Advisor mentioning that an additional chip was added to our TPT Clock, this is incorrect. The Audio Advisor does not send us proofs of their catalogs and advertisements before they go to print. They are in error regarding the chip. We did, of course, advise them as soon as we received our copy of their new catalog.

As far as your comment regarding "Witchcraft," it is like your letter: ridiculous!

What upsets me most regarding your letter is that you find it necessary to try to get your letter published without even giving me the courtesy of a phone call to discuss your thoughts. What did we do to you that was so terrible that you would find it necessary to write such a deleterious letter and try to get it published, thereby tarnishing the image of an honest and respectable company that has improved and advanced the audio industry?—George R. Tice, President, Tice Audio Products