Tact room correction?

Anyone checked out the latest hifi-news, where they rave about the updated tact RCS 2.2x dig pre-amp/room correction system for >3k.

Can u imagine what you'd get up to with a tact: endless tweaking/screwing up the sound or hifi nirvana as the article claims?
Wouldn't it be hard to set once & leave alone, when you've forked out that much for it. Hours of fun eq'ing duff tracks too...

I'd just get a behringer deq for <300quid

 

Sanj, I run an RCS 2.0 and although the learning curve is a little steep at first. it's actually an interesting and enjoyable experience.

Many here reckon it muct screw about the music etc. but it's worth investigating the technology behind it and experiencing it first hand.

On the endless tweeking opinion; well why waste money on a million cables, searching for nirvana, when you can sort out your room problems and adjust according to your 'tastes'.

It doesn't have to be a flat-response - you have choice : Your Choice.

TACT will be a @ the Heathrow show in Sept.
May be worth a visit .

I think it's slightly better than a Behringer as well .

It's good to keep an eye out for the odd s/h one as well as prices are pretty decent. The pre's also run on multi-voltage, so importing is straight forward if you find one on the likes of Audiogon .

 

I read the article. It's difficult to argue with the reviewer's personal opinion that he had never heard sound better in his room, particularly in the bass.

I wish I could apply TACT type correction to my subs alone, leaving the main speakers unadulterated by all the digital messing. I don't think I can do that though.

 

Steve,

the RCS2.2X takes just under 8ms to carry out it's correction, so in theory it is possible, just move the subs closer.

 

I don't understand. Are you saying that I wouldn't have to process the signal to the main speakers?

 

Agreed in the sense why waste money on cables, period.

Maybe I find it easier living in ignorance of my room problems. A silly thing to do, but I'll end up as some kind of eq'ing nervous wreck otherwise

Voodoo, seriously, if this is the case, I would end up using it just as an equalizer, no? (Tempting, esp. listening at low vols at night, cud use it like a loudness switch)
Or am I missing something here?
If not, then the behringer deq wud probably work just as well, as it eq's in the digitial domain & has a dig out which I could hook my dac too.
Not that I'm thinking of going down this path

 

You could do what's done here an awful lot, and use an external channel divider such as the ones made by Accuphase or Luxman and then apply EQ to the areas you desire.
IMHO, EQ doesn't screw up anything per se, but it's very easy to screw up the EQ. Subtle difference. I still haven't heard any Tact yet. Oh well, maybe I'll have to trek over to the Tokyo audio show again this year

 

It might work for the 'boy at home' listening in one chair - 2.72metres may be 8mS in one vector, but not for the person sitting somewhere else in the room. Also, I do hope the 8mS latency is a fixed guarantee, and doesnt wobble back-n-forth with every calculation, like wheat waving in the wind.

 

I think the thread will show the problem that Tact as a company face really - that being that the majority of people are unsure of it's capabilities.

I would agree that from an audiophile point of view, it's correction is limited to one particular spot in the room (although it can store settings for up to 9 different positions), but this does not mean audible improvements will not be available to other listeners - subjectively they certainly will be.

 

True. Plus, it doesn't come at a price (new, anyway) that really invites investigation... And those with more expensive kit, who could afford it, are probably less willing to try it because it makes the "logic" behind many of their expensive purchases somewhat redundant. Challenging.

 

You have to realise that the TACT deals with timing issues as well as frequencies. It's MUCH more than just EQ and I don't think the cynics really realise this. You're aslo more likely to introduc negative artefacts if you hook up a CDP/CDT into the Beringher and then into a DAC.

Using the Berhinger would be straightforward but you would never be able to acheive the accuracy [not in the musical sense] that the TACT user-interface provides.

My comments regarding flat-response were more to do with Audiophiles aspiring to accuracy when most equipment colours the music anyway. With TACT, you can modify the signal to suit by increasing or decreasing the frequencies at chosen points. This has the effect of increasing/decreasing PRaT, having more/less midrange 'presence', moving the soundstage forwards/backwards, larger/smaller.

You could probably even mimic the characteristicts of certain brands of hi_fi if so desired .

One thing worth noting though is that the equipment is very transparent in relation to partnering. If you have a crap source - expect crap.

 

Nicely put Voodoo

As a product it faces a number of hurdles, the first of which is the ignorance of the hifi public when it comes to this technology. The fact that it works in the time domain, thereby radically decreasing time smear, means that it's results are very different from those acheivable with traditional parametrics such as the Behringers and more expensive offerings from Parc and Z systems.

The other issue is one of committment. This is not a 30 minute home demo product. the typical learning curve takes months, going from noticing an improvement, to noticing something missing, to learning how to regain that which went missing whilst retaining the improvements. This requires experimentation, which is easy on a PC. No need to call on a cable doctor or audition different CD players, usually the performance you want is a few adjustments away, and this can be done by remote control prior to proper programming.

So purchase requires a leap of faith, and there is no guarantee that you will find nirvana, particularly if you like a music maker to offer classic flat earth attributes. But if you listen to setups and judge things such as image placement, stage depth, transparency and bass definition, then you will be quite amazed just what the Tact is capable of, and for that it represents astonishing value at it's new price points.

 

I wonder why you sold yours then...

 

Serious question? OK one reason was my desire to experiment with vinyl and valves and to understand the other side of the argument. After all, what is the point in claiming product A is better than product B unless you have lived with both and have been able to form a judgement. Oh and I did make a small profit

If you look elsewhere, you may well find hints that Tact forms part of my future setup. The qualities it can bring to a system are next to impossible to find elsewhere, short of totally modelling and treating the listening room.

I can see the attraction of both approaches, I did at least invest in the vinyl & valve sound, rather than sitting taking misguided pot shots at it for the sake of internet amusement. I've been lucky enough to live with quality digital setups, traditional analogue, and high end AV. I would like to merge the qualities of the first two into a truly universal system one day. It's only the AV that proved to be a massive letdown and waste of money

 

I'm keeping mine !

 

Do TacT not make AV equilisers?

 

Thats what happens when you do things half hearted, and dont take time to learn how to do it properly...

 

Yup but they're rather expensive.
Up to 10 channels .

 

yes you are right Antonio! A shame you followed muck of my advice with regards to positioning and room treatment I apologise for misleading you, but maybe you too can learn from the experience

 

Yep! But it's really just 3 2.2x strapped to one of those nasty decoders. Waste of money IMO, plus it woll not accept a 5.1 input