2. digital
  3. 1232150186

digital eq/room correction trade-offs

I am very confused about digital room correction.

For many years, it seemed the common wisdom was to have as clean a signal path as possible, with as little processing and as few conversions as possible: use a high quality DAC to get the signal to analog and then a pure pre-amp/amp to speakers.

But it now seems that many would argue that the benefits of digital eq are such that even an extra analog-digital-analog step is worth it for the benefits of digital room eq.

So, for example, I enjoy listening to CDs and SACDs using my Bel Canto PL-1A. I go analog out to my pre-amp. Is it worth it to contemplate the extra step of analog to digital for room EQ and then back to analog to the pre? I find it hard to believe that any benefits of the room EQ won't be substantially offset by the additional conversions.

Your thoughts most appreciated. Let's assume for the sake of this discussion that my room is imperfect but not horribly so (which I think is accurate).
dgaylin
dgaylin OP
255 posts
 
Thanks again everyone! any thoughts on TacT versus Lyngdorf versus some of the RCS systems built in on the newer pre/pros (Anthem D2, Integra 9.9, Classe)?
richards
145 posts
 
Lewinskih01
To answer your question, I have my Tact 2.2x preamp (w/ Maui Mods) connected to two Tact 2150 amps (one with full Maui Mods). The 2150 is actually a DAC that swings enough voltage to power a speaker -- hence, it acts as an amp.

I'm no longer using the internal DAC in the 2.2x. It's pretty good, but the 2150 is better.. One of the 2150s drives my main speakers, and the other drives the corner subs using the digital crossover in the 2.2x. So, no analog IC cables at all.
smeyers
181 posts
 
My living room is far from ideal for good sound reinforcement, as there is lots of glass, stone chimney, wood floors, etc., and I will not 'decorate' the room with lots of audio panels. I decided about a year go to try the Tact 2.2XP; it completely transformed the sound. No longer is there boomy bass, shrill treble and depressed midrange. I should mention that it takes a lot of time and patience to understand the unit, it's software, and much tweaking until it's 'right'; it certainly was not plug-n-play for me! However, it was certainly worth it in the end. I also found that using a good external DAC (I use a Lector Tube DAC) makes a substantial difference over Tact's internal one (for the main speakers; it's fine for subwoofers).
samujohn's avatar
samujohn
291 posts
 
TacT versus Lyngdorf. Good question, especially as they were recently partners in the same company (Tact).
My tech says that Tact (Baz) tries to accomplish more correction parameters than Lyngdorf with the result that the Tact system is more difficult to understand and apply. I would love to hear the specifics from someone more knowledgeable than myself.
lewinskih01
909 posts
 
On the Tact, is the volume control analog or digital? Either way I guess it's good as your feedback from it as a preamp is very good.

If it's on the analog side (which is usually recommended) and I wanted to use an external DAC, then it would need to be one with volume control so to drive an amp directly. Correct?

Thank you!
More to discover