Pauly
Emo VIPs
Posts: 5,237
|
Post by Pauly on Mar 24, 2012 16:57:56 GMT -5
Wow, click and drag EQ curves? Insane! Thanks Dan.
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Mar 24, 2012 17:08:47 GMT -5
Thanx Dan.
I will have to learn to curb my tweaking and try listening. I need therapy.
What about the phono pre-amp to for the XMC-1? Are you planning on releasing them together?
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Mar 24, 2012 17:10:38 GMT -5
Doesn't Audyssey also uses the term dynamic room correction? They call theirs "Dynamic EQ." (Correction: TacT has a trademark on "Dynamic Room Correction", not a copyright.)
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Mar 24, 2012 17:19:42 GMT -5
Doesn't Audyssey also uses the term dynamic room correction? They call theirs "Dynamic EQ." (Correction: TacT has a trademark on "Dynamic Room Correction", not a copyright.) Does Dynamic EQ uses the Fletcher Munson curves in its correction. If not, do you know and can comment on how Audyssey makes this 'dynamic' correction. Bless you !
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by klinemj on Mar 24, 2012 18:47:32 GMT -5
I'm clickin' and draggin' in my mind...COOL! Wait - the clicking is my bones, the dragging is my tired bod...
Still...can't wait to experience the XMC-1!
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Mar 24, 2012 19:54:44 GMT -5
Does Dynamic EQ uses the Fletcher Munson curves in its correction. If not, do you know and can comment on how Audyssey makes this 'dynamic' correction. Bless you ! From what I've read, Audyssey doesn't use the Fletcher Munson curves because they think they're not correct. Here's a link to Audyssey's description: www.audyssey.com/audio-technology/dynamic-eq. My TacT RCS 2.2X does not have Dynamic Room Correction (it's in the RCS 2.2XP and later TacT products). What I've read about DRC is that it is user configurable. The user can use the Fletcher Munson curves as a reference, or just what he perceives to be correct, when creating the target curves to be used by DRC. PS. I didn't upgrade to the RCS 2.2XP because it isn't compatible with the software ("TACS") used to implement driver linearization in the DSPs of my TacT S2150 amps. With TACS, the (original) S2150 amps can make the speakers anechoicly flat while the RCS can apply room correction.
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Mar 24, 2012 20:10:40 GMT -5
Does Dynamic EQ uses the Fletcher Munson curves in its correction. If not, do you know and can comment on how Audyssey makes this 'dynamic' correction. Bless you ! From what I've read, Audyssey doesn't use the Fletcher Munson curves because they think they're not correct. Here's a link to Audyssey's description: www.audyssey.com/audio-technology/dynamic-eq. My TacT RCS 2.2X does not have Dynamic Room Correction (it's in the RCS 2.2XP and later TacT products). What I've read about DRC is that it is user configurable. The user can use the Fletcher Munson curves as a reference, or just what he perceives to be correct, when creating the target curves to be used by DRC. PS. I didn't upgrade to the RCS 2.2XP because it isn't compatible with the software ("TACS") used to implement driver linearization in the DSPs of my TacT S2150 amps. With TACS, the (original) S2150 amps can make the speakers anechoicly flat while the RCS can apply room correction. Thank you a bunch. Where the hell were you when I needed an Applied Science tutor? Oh well. Quite likely you were not even born then ;D I hope that you saw Dan's post that the version in the XMC-1 will be able to make adjustments on the fly, and that he believes that the RCS in the XMC-1 will be superior to the alternatives available in market. I take it that statement means that there is NO watering down of the RCS that will be in the XMC-1. I can't wait ;D
|
|
|
Post by essheil on Mar 25, 2012 6:14:46 GMT -5
I am ready to purchase it! I am happy to be on the reserve list! My other emotiva gear I haven't opened up yet is waiting for this processor. I have to get another oppo in order to complete my emotiva setup. Still have to match this processor with another hd projector or another flat panel hdtv. I already have 4 systems, 2 sunfire, 1 pioneer sc 37 all using ribbon type speakers or planars. I think I'll purchase an electrostat for my all emotiva HT equipment. I use a NAD for my 70 inch sharp 3D. Epsons for my two hd projection systems and a casio for the third projection. ummm? I still have to get more gear for this XMC-1 for my 5th music and HT room. I already have 3 oppo for 3 systems. The L.E.D sharp tv uses a NAD receiver and a sharp for 3d blu ray. My emotiva gear once completed will be my newest and reference HT system, because I just might buy a 4th projector that is 3D, possibly a panasonic this time, since my other ones are not 3D except the flat panel tv. ;D
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Mar 25, 2012 13:35:05 GMT -5
I would definitely like to see a treatise on the pros & cons of how Audyssey and TacT implementation of dynamic EQ/RC. Interestingly, Audyssey dismissed the Fletcher Munson phenomenon because as they claimed, the earlier data developed at Bell Labs were inaccurate. More recent data is alleged to be more accurate. But they don't explicitly explain how that data is used in Dynamic EQ. On the other hand, TacT makes it explicitly clear that Fletcher Munson is fully utilized. And with Dynamic Room Correction, an infinite number curves are utilized and and can be modified by the user. Plus, TacT allows the user to see the effects on the room before and after. The question for me is: Which is more accurate? Who will have the bragging rights?
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Mar 25, 2012 15:59:46 GMT -5
I would definitely like to see a treatise on the pros & cons of how Audyssey and TacT implementation of dynamic EQ/RC. Interestingly, Audyssey dismissed the Fletcher Munson phenomenon because as they claimed, the earlier data developed at Bell Labs were inaccurate. More recent data is alleged to be more accurate. But they don't explicitly explain how that data is used in Dynamic EQ. On the other hand, TacT makes it explicitly clear that Fletcher Munson is fully utilized. And with Dynamic Room Correction, an infinite number curves are utilized and and can be modified by the user. Plus, TacT allows the user to see the effects on the room before and after. The question for me is: Which is more accurate? Who will have the bragging rights? I'm not sure that TacT's DRC utilizes the Fletcher Munson (FM) curves automatically. Unfortunately, the manual that describes DRC setup is not currently available on TacT's website, although a DRC document is: www.tactlab.com/Resources/Downloads/RCS22XP/DynamicRoomCorrection.pdfThis document does mention the FM curves, but doesn't specifically say they are used. It does say, "The system is based on one reference target curve and eight additional target curves called dynamic target curves. The reference target curve is used to perform basic reference room correction. Dynamic target curves are labeled 0, -6, -12, -18, -24, -30, -36 and –42 dB and are combined with the reference target curve to obtain the final target curve used to calculate correction filters." So I believe that the user creates his own "dynamic" target curves, which could be based on the FM curves if so desired. My friends at the TacT Audio Users Group ( tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/TacTAudioUsersGroup/) don't seem to use DRC as I have not been able to find any messages describing its use. The "TacT way" of room correction has always been to let the user determine the target curve unlike other room correction systems such as Audyssey and Lyngdorf's RoomPerfect, which provide little or no user control over the target curve. The problem is that there is no definitive "most accurate" when it comes to room correction. It depends on the acoustic characteristics of the individual room and the frequency response and dispersion pattern of the individual speaker. "Accuracy" in room correction has more to do with how close the corrected response matches the target curve. But there is no one target curve that is accurate for all speakers and rooms. That's why some users like Audyssey room correction and others don't.
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Mar 25, 2012 16:22:33 GMT -5
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Mar 25, 2012 16:38:12 GMT -5
Man you're a Godsend. I believe that audiophiles would find TacT to be more preferable since it allows the user to set their own target curve and have a chance of seeing what you're doing. And if you don't want to do the heavy lifting, the automated feature will do it for you. Thanks for the suggested readings. I've got some research to do ;D.
|
|
|
Post by ausman on Mar 25, 2012 19:11:04 GMT -5
I wonder if Emo is going to look at the PIP tech that denon and onkyo is starting to play with..
it makes for some interesting thoughts in use within the xmc-1, may be Emo can look at may be deploying that type of solution within context of a xpander unit like denon did some years ago as a companion piece for the avp
may be emo could do something similar.. though have extend into additional boxes..
given the pip option now available on entry level gear in these 2 co's, it makes for interesting ideas....
on how capitolize on the pip tech....
|
|
stiehl11
Emo VIPs
Give me available light!
Posts: 7,261
|
Post by stiehl11 on Mar 25, 2012 22:39:22 GMT -5
I think OSD is fine for now. If I need PIP I'll go out and buy Denon and Onkyo. If Emo wants to add it at a later date to the firmware then I wouldn't be opposed to it. But, I think we're getting what we're getting if we're getting it by June/July.
Anybody else feel like waiting even longer so that we can get PIP???
|
|
|
Post by weigle2 on Mar 26, 2012 6:44:42 GMT -5
I for one, will NOT wait any longer for something like PIP. As Queen said "I want it now, and I want it all"
How many years has it been, already?
|
|
|
Post by roadster on Mar 26, 2012 7:03:32 GMT -5
Not a big deal at all for me either, if world class performance and user friendliness are integrated, I'm in.
|
|
|
Post by ausman on Mar 26, 2012 7:37:04 GMT -5
ah it was an idea is all, not that I care for it, though as a after thought, I would say it would be a great idea if what ever hdmi board they put in supported the feature, and just add the firmware to support it later..
the intial reason I brought the idea up, was having the option of an expanding route tree..
having and option like brake-out type switch board full of component hardware using hdmi as the pip tech to browse, to something like a ps2/xbox/and s-vid stereo for snes n64 and forth, and having a second hdmi unit to handle 360/ps3/wu and a complete hdmi board for a few cx960's.. just ideas of expanding the the pip tech was the aim..
if PIP was available and emo did a couple of extender expansion boards I think it would something no-one has thought of doing with hdmi until today I could even see the option of pip attached to home security via hdmi.. the list is endless..
|
|
|
Post by weigle2 on Mar 26, 2012 8:26:59 GMT -5
In my mind there are too many HDMI issues already. Adding another feature routed through HDMI just increases the risk of more problems, besides the handshake issue. I am a firm believer in the KISS principle. Yes, it is a cool idea, but let us just get the basics working first before adding potential problems.
But, that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by ladesign on Mar 26, 2012 9:36:37 GMT -5
I think OSD is fine for now. If I need PIP I'll go out and buy Denon and Onkyo. If Emo wants to add it at a later date to the firmware then I wouldn't be opposed to it. But, I think we're getting what we're getting if we're getting it by June/July. Anybody else feel like waiting even longer so that we can get PIP??? The PIP feature in the new Onkyo models is not something that can be added as a software upgrade. It is done through their choice of HDMI processor, which is likely NOT the same part EMO will use or one suspects they would have promoted the "InstaPrevue" feature. Either you have it or not. Thus, this fixed hardware architecture choice you make one way or the other and are then stuck with. On the other hand, it really isn't a true PIP but rather a use of PIP-type thumbnail views of the HDMI input sources. You can look at whats connected and select one. It is not a traditional PIP where you can view two sources at once and select the size of the main vs. secondary image and then swap them. Can't really think of anyone doing that anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Youthman on Mar 26, 2012 9:42:36 GMT -5
The original attached OLED image is no longer working.
|
|