Anyone HEARD the qol 'signal completion' device?

I'm finding the principle/effects of this device more obtuse the more it is being discussed, partially because without a dealer in uk/europe, free trial is inconvenient (no blame ascribed to BSGT), so I can only go along with opposing comments and interesting references on this thread.
I understand that many here gain real benefits in their systems, and the following is in no way a criticism of them. But it appears that the unit may well simply be a mid-side processor. This is borne out by contributors to another forum (Audionervosa) who have experience of record mastering and find they can duplicate the effects of the QOL with other equipment like the $1500 Rupert Neve Portico 5014, and feel that it adds an unwanted 'phasey' Q-sound type character to the signal (in effect after the record has been mastered).
So if the effects of the QOL can be duplicated by existing mid-side processors (at much lower cost than the QOL), can we not safely assume the QOL simply does this and nothing original otherwise. I'll bet 99% of A'goners weren't even aware of mid-side stereo processing ( I certainly wasn't). My tentative conclusion is that listeners with possible problem rooms (which would be good environments for Rives-type treatments otherwise), and systems that may sound a little flat and shallow in soundstaging, and maybe a little hard in the way of many high powered solid state/low efficiency speakers with complicated crossovers would benefit from the warmth/'wet' ambience that the QOL 'phaseyness' provides. Rooms/systems that are less problematic/livelier, with warmer/more effusive sound quality (poss. vinyl/tube based/full range crossoverless spkrs) may find this 'phaseyness' detrimental.
This final conclusion is borne out by a speaker designer who felt the QOL in a room benefited solid state amps, but not tubes, with the rest of the system/room identical.
I want to reiterate again this is NOT a criticism of those listeners with systems/rooms the QOL has benefitted, but at moment I feel the QOL is not likely to be the quantum leap beyond stereo it is being promoted as, and will be VERY system/room dependent.
I'm looking at a parallel unit (NeutralAudio X-DREI) that again fits between pre and pow, and aims to convert spurious square and triangle waves (detrimentally created by power supplies/dacs etc) to sine waves to declutter signal to spkrs and reduce load/improve 'intelligibility' (my take). I feel this may be a more interesting way to go.
Marc

I read the same comments in Audionervosa by another so called "expert". Hogwash I say!
There is no phasey sound, it sounds all natural.
The Qol just sounds like the whole signal is now being heard. If the Recording has a lot of reverb in it , then the sound may sound deeper in that regards. If the recording has no special processing then the Qol just makes it sound more refreshing and open.
The Qol may be based on older technology or maybe not.

Boy, after reading this entire thread, I sure wish I had made the effort to listen to my friend's Qol during his "in-home trial period". Unfortunately, I couldn't make it in time and he returned the unit before I could hear it or borrow it for my own system.

Ozzy I totally understand your emotional response. I found myself getting fired-up after any criticism of the qol unit as if someone had trashed my best girl friend, the one that knows all the right moves. And like you feel those who do not like the qol either did not spend enough time with unit or had a faulty one. I listen to music much more and with much more enjoyment than before qol. Long live qol I need it every night.

All the QOL proponents out there ought not to take our cooler, skeptical thoughts about it to heart too deeply, like all components, if it works for you in your system, that's great.
The rest of us can muse as to it's technical merit, and in my opinion there has to be something more substantial revealed about it's method than the claim of a quantum leap fwd over stereo in the revealing of hitherto hidden information in the signal.
Too many contributors to varying forums incl. those involved in record mastering where mid-side processing is common, relay the QOL's uncanny similarity to this process, for this to be irrelevant.