Bart
Minor Hero
Posts: 14
|
Post by Bart on Apr 10, 2013 17:20:07 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong, I have been waiting along time for the XMC-1. But I have no stereo since my NAD started failing and I really miss not having 5.1 surround. I guess all I was really trying to say is that I feel like some others and that the TacT may be holding up the release of the XMC-1. Bottom line for me I guess, is that if I felt the TacT company was still in buisiness I would feel better about the progress of the XMC-1 being released in a timely manner.
|
|
|
Post by mickeyharlow on Apr 10, 2013 18:02:58 GMT -5
I would not be surprised to find that Emotiva ends up owning Tact. Just a thought. It sure would insure the support for Tact.
|
|
|
Post by srrndhound on Apr 10, 2013 18:41:05 GMT -5
Another topic I'll revisit is all the discussion on Dynamic Room Correction ... I have it on my TCS mkIII and its also on the TacT RCS 2.2XP. I don't use it and I don't know anyone else who does. Any particular reason? Not even for low level listening?
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Apr 10, 2013 19:01:28 GMT -5
Another topic I'll revisit is all the discussion on Dynamic Room Correction ... I have it on my TCS mkIII and its also on the TacT RCS 2.2XP. I don't use it and I don't know anyone else who does. Any particular reason? Not even for low level listening? The primary reason is that I live alone in a house on an acre. As a long time member of the Tact Audio User Group, I have not read any posts on using DRC. So it seems like the other members don't use it, or at least don't post about it. I can understand those who have a family or close neighbors may find it useful. I would recommend for those who do implement DRC that instead of boosting the target curves in the low and high frequencies per the Fletcher-Munson curves, that they attenuate the mid-range frequencies instead. This will prevent digital clipping as the correction curves are applied to the input signal. But that may be obvious since the objective is to reduce the overall SPL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2013 19:51:01 GMT -5
Well, I'm going with Tip's opinion on this matter, he is the Lounge's resident TacT expert. And isn't it wonderful to have folks such as him (and Doc1963, SolidState, BoomZilla, and *many* others) who care so much about this crazy hobby of ours?
I know I can get a bit, ummmmm, "cranky" at times (Who me? Perish the thought!!) but I do so much enjoy this addiction we're all part of and I just wanted to give a big shout-out to my buds here on The Lounge!!
-RW-
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Apr 10, 2013 22:04:11 GMT -5
Tip Does a positive EQ bump in TacT actually lead to digital clipping? Seems like in that case they wouldn't even allow it to begin with. With Audyssey, I've seen that the highest positive EQ band works together with the volume control (and will essentially limit the max volume in most implementations). It combines volume with EQ +/- dB to get the digitally optimal (max w/out clipping) result (typically with 24bits of dynamic range). Of course, there are different ways to implement EQ. I understand how digital audio (and clipping) works, but there are ways to process and handle +dB EQ bands without it being a problem whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by thoranderson on Apr 10, 2013 23:43:26 GMT -5
I would not be surprised to find that Emotiva ends up owning Tact. Just a thought. It sure would insure the support for Tact. Oh my yes! Emotiva clearly understands solid state amps. More specifically, Emo has demonstrated the ability to handle analog sound at a superior level. With the Carver acquisition, some would say they now have some of the best valve capabilities on the planet. Regardless of how my other posts have been received, I am very excited about the XMC-1 - especially with the inclusion of TACT. If it works as well as indicated by those who have experienced it, exclusive access to TACT technology by Emotiva would be absolutely killer! It is always nice to dream...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2013 0:22:29 GMT -5
This company really has some exciting things going on! And, who knows, perhaps they even have some digital or ICE amps in the making. Wouldn't it be way cool to have a 5-channel amp kicking out 250 watts/ch. and weighing in at a mere 40 - 50 lbs.?
Or take the ICE technology and build a world-class multi-channel receiver using the XMC-1 front-end with ICE amps churning out the power? Imagine if they could bring this to market for $2500 or less...
-RW-
|
|
|
Post by srrndhound on Apr 11, 2013 2:39:16 GMT -5
The primary reason is that I live alone in a house on an acre. Ok. So it's not because you tried it and found it worked poorly. It's just that you have no need for it. Any competently designed digital EQ (or any algorithm for that matter) will never result in clipping regardless of the settings. The volume limiting Fantom mentioned is not actually limiting so as to reduce the clipping. The gain reduction to protect from clipping is applied in the digital domain. The analog volume control after the DAC is shifted to add the same amount of gain, thus compensating invisibly to the end user (the display does not show it). That can result in a reduction in maximum volume since some of the range has been given over to compensate for the digital level changes. Not all products exhibit this reduction in volume range -- they cleverly reserve part of the control range just for that.
|
|
|
Post by calvinhobbe on Apr 11, 2013 7:16:38 GMT -5
TacT Audio did have Internet sales of its products, but at the same price you'd pay a dealer. And for all practical purposes, TacT is out of business at this time but may get back into business in the future when Boz thinks the time is right for his new products (see my previous posts). TacT Audio currently is not communicating with its customers or dealers, nor providing service for its products. I'm starting to feel like a broken record (for those of you who remember what a record was ) as I have addressed this issue several times in this thread and others. But Chaosrv is correct, this has nothing to do with the TacT TCS3e room correction in the XMC-1. Boz has a obligation to Emotiva to make sure TCS3e works on the XMC-1 and Emotiva will support the XMC-1 with TCS3e. If Bart would rather buy another pre/pro because of the status of TacT Audio, that is his prerogative. Perhaps he believes that there won't be future upgrades to TCS3e because TacT Audio is not currently in business, but does Audyssey provide upgrades to its room correction in existing products? I don't know, but I don't believe they do. So what does all this have to do with "trust"? It comes down to this: if you want the features that are unique to TacT TCS3e, then wait for the XMC-1. You say that Boz has "an obligation to Emo" right after you say that TacT is not responding to their Dealers & Customers, which there would be legal obligations to as well (or maybe not & that is why TacT isn't responding? Who knows?). Can't have it both ways... That is unless TacT and the business providing the EQ to Emo are totally different companies without links etc and so on...it would be very difficult before the courts & creditors and so forth.
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 11, 2013 7:31:11 GMT -5
You say that Boz has "an obligation to Emo" right after you say that TacT is not responding to their Dealers & Customers, which there would be legal obligations to as well (or maybe not & that is why TacT isn't responding? Who knows?). Can't have it both ways... That is unless TacT and the business providing the EQ to Emo are totally different companies without links etc and so on...it would be very difficult before the courts & creditors and so forth. You raise an interesting point. I know if I was an owner of TacT Audio gear and I could no longer get support I wouldn't be very happy. To then read the owner of TacT (Boz) is in partnership with Emotiva to create a TacT RC for the XMC-1 would really make matters worse IMO. I find it odd that Boz' name was being mentioned by Emotiva quite often when it was announced that the XMC-1 would have TacT RC. But it has been quite awhile since I have seen Boz' name mentioned on the Lounge. Hopefully Boz did not abandon Emotiva like he did with TacT Audio component owners. Bill
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2013 9:44:09 GMT -5
> Hopefully Boz did not abandon Emotiva like he did with TacT Audio component owners.
Don't forget, TacT is software. Presumably EMO has licenced the TacT algorisms and source code and is fitting into their own firmware. If Big Dan just gave Boz a pile of cash to write finished code for them, to be supplied as a finished product, they are at Boz' mercy. Worse case, EMO can always port EmoQ.
/b
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,771
|
Post by klinemj on Apr 11, 2013 11:23:10 GMT -5
Time will tell on Dr. Boz and Emotiva. It sure was great to meet him and have him demo TaCT at Emofest. In that version, the DRC impact was dramatic, as was the basic room correction. As to Emotiva buying TaCT...are you crazy? Next thing you'll tell me Emotiva is buying Carver....ludicrous! Mark
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 11, 2013 11:30:48 GMT -5
Time will tell on Dr. Boz and Emotiva. It sure was great to meet him and have him demo TaCT at Emofest. In that version, the DRC impact was dramatic, as was the basic room correction. As to Emotiva buying TaCT...are you crazy? Next thing you'll tell me Emotiva is buying Carver....ludicrous! Mark Well in response to that, I say read my lips:
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Apr 11, 2013 14:12:48 GMT -5
Tip Does a positive EQ bump in TacT actually lead to digital clipping? Seems like in that case they wouldn't even allow it to begin with. With Audyssey, I've seen that the highest positive EQ band works together with the volume control (and will essentially limit the max volume in most implementations). It combines volume with EQ +/- dB to get the digitally optimal (max w/out clipping) result (typically with 24bits of dynamic range). Of course, there are different ways to implement EQ. I understand how digital audio (and clipping) works, but there are ways to process and handle +dB EQ bands without it being a problem whatsoever. The first TacT processors automatically normalized the correction filters (adjusted to have a maximum level of 0 dBFS) so that they would not induce digital clipping. The TacT processors did not compensate for the attenuation by automatically increasing the volume. When the RCS 2.2X and TCS mkII were released (~2001), the automatic normalization of the correction filters was removed. It was left to the user to adjust the level of the target curve (i.e. move it below the measurement) to avoid creating a correction filter that could cause digital clipping. Boz said he had removed the automatic normalization because many users had complained about the attenuation of the corrected sound and that normalization to 0 dBFS wasn't needed in all cases, e.g., recordings that have a max level well below 0 dBFS, or boost at frequencies that usually are not at high levels (this would apply mostly to classical music recordings.) Then when the RCS 2.2XP and TCS mkIII were released, Boz added a "Correction Control" window to the PC software tools that allowed the user to set the normalization level from -18 dB to +18 dB. I only have experience with the TacT TCS mkIII pre/pro and I don't know how Emotiva will address this with TacT TCS 3e for the XMC-1. But I think they'll probably follow the method you mentioned that is used by Audyssey. Thanks for the input! Tip
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Apr 11, 2013 14:54:30 GMT -5
TacT Audio did have Internet sales of its products, but at the same price you'd pay a dealer. And for all practical purposes, TacT is out of business at this time but may get back into business in the future when Boz thinks the time is right for his new products (see my previous posts). TacT Audio currently is not communicating with its customers or dealers, nor providing service for its products. I'm starting to feel like a broken record (for those of you who remember what a record was ) as I have addressed this issue several times in this thread and others. But Chaosrv is correct, this has nothing to do with the TacT TCS3e room correction in the XMC-1. Boz has a obligation to Emotiva to make sure TCS3e works on the XMC-1 and Emotiva will support the XMC-1 with TCS3e. If Bart would rather buy another pre/pro because of the status of TacT Audio, that is his prerogative. Perhaps he believes that there won't be future upgrades to TCS3e because TacT Audio is not currently in business, but does Audyssey provide upgrades to its room correction in existing products? I don't know, but I don't believe they do. So what does all this have to do with "trust"? It comes down to this: if you want the features that are unique to TacT TCS3e, then wait for the XMC-1. You say that Boz has "an obligation to Emo" right after you say that TacT is not responding to their Dealers & Customers, which there would be legal obligations to as well (or maybe not & that is why TacT isn't responding? Who knows?). Can't have it both ways... That is unless TacT and the business providing the EQ to Emo are totally different companies without links etc and so on...it would be very difficult before the courts & creditors and so forth. That's a very good point. The TacT correction system probably is owned by Boz personally, and so in a way is separate from TacT Audio. But on the other hand, I don't think that TacT Audio has a legal obligation to its dealers to provide them with products forever, or to provide service for its products once the warranty has expired. The biggest reason that TacT doesn't service its older products is that they are, in a way, mostly computers and the computer chips (memory, microprocessors, DSPs, etc.) are out of production -- I know, I've tried to buy them. (BTW, I was a firmware engineer at one of the major process-control/automation companies and we had to constantly redesign our product line because we could no longer buy the chips needed to manufacture the hardware.) As far as the TacT TCS3e room correction software that Boz has licensed to Emotiva, it is mostly software that has existed for years and it's Emotiva, with Boz's assistance, that is porting it to the XMC-1 as Emotiva has designed the hardware. Tip PS. "Calvinhobbe" eh? I grew up and live just a few miles from Chagrin Falls, where Bill Watterson grew up and lived. He still lives in the far east side of Cleveland. For many years I rode bicycles with his father Jim, who was the model for Calvin's father (you remember in the comic strip that Calvin's father rode his bike on the weekends?). He's short, wears round eyeglasses, and was a patent attorney. I also rode with Bill's brother, but Bill was still in bed while we were riding early on weekend mornings.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Apr 11, 2013 18:19:32 GMT -5
Tip Does a positive EQ bump in TacT actually lead to digital clipping? Seems like in that case they wouldn't even allow it to begin with. With Audyssey, I've seen that the highest positive EQ band works together with the volume control (and will essentially limit the max volume in most implementations). It combines volume with EQ +/- dB to get the digitally optimal (max w/out clipping) result (typically with 24bits of dynamic range). Of course, there are different ways to implement EQ. I understand how digital audio (and clipping) works, but there are ways to process and handle +dB EQ bands without it being a problem whatsoever. The first TacT processors automatically normalized the correction filters (adjusted to have a maximum level of 0 dBFS) so that they would not induce digital clipping. The TacT processors did not compensate for the attenuation by automatically increasing the volume. When the RCS 2.2X and TCS mkII were released (~2001), the automatic normalization of the correction filters was removed. It was left to the user to adjust the level of the target curve (i.e. move it below the measurement) to avoid creating a correction filter that could cause digital clipping. Boz said he had removed the automatic normalization because many users had complained about the attenuation of the corrected sound and that normalization to 0 dBFS wasn't needed in all cases, e.g., recordings that have a max level well below 0 dBFS, or boost at frequencies that usually are not at high levels (this would apply mostly to classical music recordings.) Then when the RCS 2.2XP and TCS mkIII were released, Boz added a "Correction Control" window to the PC software tools that allowed the user to set the normalization level from -18 dB to +18 dB. I only have experience with the TacT TCS mkIII pre/pro and I don't know how Emotiva will address this with TacT TCS 3e for the XMC-1. But I think they'll probably follow the method you mentioned that is used by Audyssey. Thanks for the input! Tip Quite the history. Thanks for the info!
|
|
|
Post by calvinhobbe on Apr 12, 2013 7:08:24 GMT -5
You say that Boz has "an obligation to Emo" right after you say that TacT is not responding to their Dealers & Customers, which there would be legal obligations to as well (or maybe not & that is why TacT isn't responding? Who knows?). Can't have it both ways... That is unless TacT and the business providing the EQ to Emo are totally different companies without links etc and so on...it would be very difficult before the courts & creditors and so forth. You raise an interesting point. I know if I was an owner of TacT Audio gear and I could no longer get support I wouldn't be very happy. To then read the owner of TacT (Boz) is in partnership with Emotiva to create a TacT RC for the XMC-1 would really make matters worse IMO. I find it odd that Boz' name was being mentioned by Emotiva quite often when it was announced that the XMC-1 would have TacT RC. But it has been quite awhile since I have seen Boz' name mentioned on the Lounge. Hopefully Boz did not abandon Emotiva like he did with TacT Audio component owners. Bill Bill, I hear you, lots of issues and many are out in the open with Boz. Hate to say it, but it appears he has a reputation for this type of thing from some pretty solid sources. If this is the XMC-1 delay, then it is a major item. Way back when some individuals said they would take the TacTless XMC-1 at a lower price and then "buy" the upgrade as they were not too trusting that once received that TacT would happen. Deja Vu all over again. Even if Emo owns the TacT code (very unlikely) in their deal with Boz, the courts would tie that up in litigation as Boz's creditors and clients went after any money from Emo to Boz. They may have licensed the code, BUT when it hits the courts all bets are off as the receiver would be looking to get money to pay the receiver, then the secured creditor etc. Any intellectual property would go up for bids and whoever buys it would own it, and I am not sure Emo would be in a position (financially) to bid against Krell, Classee, etc. Just imagine what a court appointed receiver would do with that situation (ye Krell, I am leaning your way, but I need to be sure that you are the best company to sell XYZ to so I would need the following pieces of equipment to test...) ...lol Darned if you do and darned if you don't. This also reminds me of the Outlaw issues with their having to cancel one of their Pre/Pros allegedly due to the Chinese just saying we will not finish the product...they got caught in a situation where they were at the mercy of "someone" else.
|
|
|
Post by calvinhobbe on Apr 12, 2013 8:11:34 GMT -5
Tip PS. "Calvinhobbe" eh? I grew up and live just a few miles from Chagrin Falls, where Bill Watterson grew up and lived. He still lives in the far east side of Cleveland. For many years I rode bicycles with his father Jim, who was the model for Calvin's father (you remember in the comic strip that Calvin's father rode his bike on the weekends?). He's short, wears round eyeglasses, and was a patent attorney. I also rode with Bill's brother, but Bill was still in bed while we were riding early on weekend mornings. I miss his writings and his down to earth approach. Many wish he would reconsider his retirment of the strip.
|
|
|
Post by mickeyharlow on Apr 12, 2013 10:30:28 GMT -5
I am sure that Dan had a contract in place. Most contracts have contingencies for such events including the death of the individual. So, all we are doing is speculating because we are not privy to the terms of the contract. I am sure that Dan has everything under control.
|
|