2. digital
  3. 984698289

TACT RCS 2.0 Users Group

I've recently purchased the TACT RCS 2.0 unit. As I've been wrestling with getting the optimum performance out of it, I keep thinking there must be other owners out there that have ideas to share, as well as those who could benefit from what I've learned.

I was hoping this thread would provide a forum to introduce us to each other.

Anyone interested in sharing what you've learned?

I for one have found the unit difficult to get a true grasp of how to optimise, but once learned, it has produced the best sound of any component I've ever added to my system. My system currently consists of a Sony SCD1 to the TACT 2.0 RCS with internal DAC and D/A converter. Signal is then fed from the TACT in analog format to my Art Audio Jota and then to the Avantgarde Duo Hornspeakers.
I'll start by stating I've found the suggestions in the TACT documentation for speaker placement to be contra to good sound. I've gotten the best results by using George Cardas's Near Field logic and using the TACT Nearfield target curve as the beginning point to custom build my personal target curves.

This resulted in a sound stage this is awesome and the clarity of the frequencies is without compare in my experience.

However, it took over 100 hours of experimentation to reach this result - a lot of lessons learned. At this point, I feel I know just enough to be dangerous!
tao
Ag insider logo xs@2x
drubin
3,275 posts
 
I am in complete agreement with you on the Fletcher-Munson thing, 1439bhr. The high end has eschewed equalization for good reasons, but if Fletcher-Munson is true, we are giving up a lot for the sake of purity of signal. I happen to listen mostly at lower levels. Am I trying for Fletcher-Munson compensation in my choice of components? Could be.

As I understand it, F-M compensation varies by volume. So an F-M target curve for 80 db would be different from one for 70db. Can of worms. If the software could adjust variably for volume, now that would be something!

Which raises another question. Is the volume of the system at the time of TacT measurement something to be concerned with? The TacT literature suggests not, but I wonder. With no preamp in the system (using the TacT as the only preamp), the test signal is pretty freaking loud. Should it be calibrated to normal listening levels (can it be?) or does it not matter?
1439bhr
85 posts
 
Drubin, quite right about the F-M curves being indexed by reference SPL level... you'd have to program a set of target curves (no problem-o with TacT's 9 EQ memories). I think what happens in real life is that room gain gives the bass boost which is a key feature of the F-M curve... so even a speaker that measures flat anechoically will approximate a F-M curve. I think a lot of what goes on with system matching (including cable-ology) is an indirect attempt to equalize the system frequency response (to an actual F-M curve? actually, to the actual response of thatindividual's ear)

As far as volume level goes, it affects the SNR of the calibration measurement, so higher volume is better from that standpoint. On the other hand, I could see that loud pulses could start driving an amp and speaker into dynamic compression, which would alter the measured frequency response (the amplitude-compressed pulse would have differenct spectral content than the assumed spectral content of the digitally generated reference pulse). I haven't experimented with this issue; I simply set my preamp gain to what corresponds to a fairly loud listening level.
raider
11 posts
 
Hi,

I've been using the Behringer Ultracurve room correction system with positive results and I am looking to move to the full TACT AA.

However, I have a question about the analog to digital conversion. When using the Ultracurve and feeding it a variable analog in from my prepro, there is a distinct quantization distortion at low volume levels.

This is caused by the low level of the signal the unit receives.

Has anyone found this to be a problem with the TACT?

Thanks
metaphysics
192 posts
 
Does anyone see any drawbacks when using the Tact as a preamp, i.e. sonic degradation? This is a common complaint with other digital preamps, e.g. Wadia 27ix. As a point of reference, I'd be eliminating a BAT VK-50SE.
pls1
432 posts
 
I assume from your question that you would be using the Tact as a DAC also. The DAC portions of the Tact or the Sigtech are not as good as the best DAC's out there. The combination of a DSP and an MSB Platinum DAC (which I used for the last year) will give you a better sound. Th choice of volume control could be in the preamp or a Z-Systems (which is also an excellent unit).
More to discover