Rives PARC or Tact 2.0 AA for room correction?

Mr. Rives,

I appreciate your detailed reply and found it quite topical to my concerns.

I can also appreciate the introduction of digital artifacts (you mentioned ringing) with FFT filters (I've studied/designed such devices under Dr. Paul Horowitz). Still, one must weight the impact of such distortions against the larger issue of the room's corruption of the time component of the signal; for me, it is not hard to imagine such artifacts ultimatelly falling into the noise, particularly if the system is highly adjustable (as the TACT is).

At the end of the day, however, I suppose I'm still stuck with the inevitable home audition (you see, I am quite lazy :-). I only wish audio dealers were more receptive towards carrying such products, so I could give the different approaches the acid test: listening to them.

Again, thanks for your reply.

Best,

If you're interested in an analog EQ, then the TACT doesn't qualify. It is a digital device.

Robert E Greene is on the faculty at UCLA.

Thanks, I am grateful for all for your informative feedback. I'm glad my question has also stirred discussion on an issue that has concerned many.

For all practical purposes, it seems like the Rives is the better way to go if I want to preserve a purer analog signal. Will try to audition that in my system.

Alternatively I'm also thinking of a used 2.2x with the better DAC, if resale prices are close to the Rives and affordable.

Apart from the Absolute Sound review, has anybody out there compared/listened to the Tact 2.2X and the Rives PARC and made any observations?

ACW, is you primary source component CD or vinyl?