|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 21:44:16 GMT -5
It looked pretty plain to me (wherever I saw the pic) certainly nothing like the Trinnov mic with it's multiple capsules. The Trinnov system is very different from any other RCS. With its four element microphone system, it is able to determine the height of the speakers. I believe it also can determine not only the sound pressure level of the sound, but also its velocity (nulls have no SPL but still have velocity). |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Dec 12, 2012 21:53:33 GMT -5
RCS systems like Audyssey take measurements at multiple locations so that it can create a larger, although less effective, sweet spot for the benefit of several listeners. RCS systems like RoomPerfect take multiple measurements, first at the prime listening position and then all over the room (at non-listening positions) to gain what it calls "room knowledge". RoomPerfect is then able to discern the room acoustics and separate them from the speaker response at the prime listening position. So it knows what it can correct and what it can't. Is Lyngdorf's Room Perfect a TacT based design? I ask because in a review I just quickly read of RoomPerfect states that you take multiple measurements to maximize the RP-1’s “Room Knowledge". www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?bShowUnpublished=&hArticle=101&PageOfArticle=1Bill |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:03:36 GMT -5
As I recall TacT was design for 2 channel in mind initially, as they're a two channel base company first. So I hope they don't abandon their roots, or change things in favor of Home theater. The first TacT RCS was 2.2 channels, and was named the "RCS 2.2". The next product was the "RCS 2.0", which was only two main channels, but did provide for multiple measurements (I think up to 8 IIRC). There was also a "RCS 2.0S", which was an updated RCS 2.0 based on the RCS 2.2X. Then came the "RCS 2.2X" which was 2.2. It was updated and released as the "RCS 2.2XP" (that was the unit used at Emofest) and the RCS 2.2 Mini. TacT also had the TCS (Theater Correction system) that had 10 output channels, then the TCS mkII, and finally the TCS mkIII, which has 12 output channels. Any channel of the TCS could be configured for main or sub correction. In addition there was a special 2+2 version that implemented Ralph Glasgal's Ambiophonics surround system. TacT also has applied its RCS to its line of integrated stereo amps in the form of the 2150XDM. |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:14:56 GMT -5
I would definitely be curious to know how, if any, the tact computations change when playing stereo vs multi channel. I guess I didn't know whether or not it effectively measures and computes corrections for each channel or really wants to do it for all channels. I am 80/20 music/video, but am really looking forward to Tact for my stereo music. I've always wanted to try it. You can just set all the presets for HT and let the channel mode determine which channels are playing. Or you can set one (or more) correction preset for stereo and one (or more) correction preset for HT. These could be different in the target curve you chose for each application. Other than having different target curves, there could be a difference in output level if say one of the surrounds or subs requires more "lift" than the front stereo channels. Each channel is measured separately and then all channels are aligned in time and level. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,093
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 12, 2012 22:17:07 GMT -5
Quite true...and at Emofest, this was the point which was clearly not decided. Time will tell what, exactly, is implemented and what is not.
In addition to the pre-set target curves and pre-set Fletcher-Munson-like DRC curves, Tact CAN have user-adjustable room target curves AND user-adjustable F-M-style curves. And, it can have 2 channel or more capability. What is has, from my understanding is a function of computing power.
Question is...what features will we have within the computing power provided?
Time will tell...
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:21:28 GMT -5
TACT really has my interest in the 2 channel realm. Yet I'm heading towards a XSP-1 based pre. Does anyone think Emotiva eventually may be headed in the direction of offering a 2.2 based outboard TACT implementation that could be leveraged through the woderful external processer loop that the XSP-1 offers? Or is this just not possible due to how TACT works. According the reports from Emofest, Dan Laufman said that he plans on using the TacT RCS in other products in the future. Check the threads on Emofest. |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:28:00 GMT -5
On the other hand we have two ears and not just one. Very true and no two ears/brains are alike. However your comment did spark an interesting idea. Imagine a pair of headphones that aren't headphones at all but stereo mics for RC measurement. It would virtually guarantee correct mike placement with regards to seating position.  Actually some TacT owners have tried this. They took a measurement with the mic located at the left ear position and another measurement at the right ear position and then swapped the left and right correction files for a single correction preset. They reported that it sound worse than the correction when having the mic centered between the ear locations. |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:35:12 GMT -5
...Bottom line, based on what I studied in physics on waves (2 years in high school, 2 years at Purdue) and their predictability - I tend to lean w/Dr. Boz's comments... Mark Hey Mark, what was your major and when were you there? Tip (BS in Computer Science, Purdue University, 1976 ) |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:40:50 GMT -5
I'm no engineer either. But my limited understanding tells me that unless your system is interactive (changes room frequency as you change positions) no particular seating position will be fully optimized. Every position is compromised to compensate for the other. Since the audio is radiating from 1 position in the room, the room frequency will change as you change positions. But if you measure from 1 position, you will have a reference of how to compensate for other likely positions to make them sound like the main seating position. You simply cannot have several main seating positions for the same room in relation to the speakers. It's not only that, but both the SPL and distance (i.e. latency) will change. Due to the precedence effect, the sound you hear first determines location more than the sound level (up to a point). |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:49:09 GMT -5
The TacT systems we sold back in the day were 2-channel only and cost upwards of $12,000. That alone explains why they are not more "popular"... As I mentioned in an earlier post, the first TacT RCS was 2.2 (the "RCS 2.2") and cost $4900. I bought the second generation TacT RCS in 2000, the "RCS 2.0", which was 2 channel and cost $4300 with both digital and analog inputs and outputs ($3000 with only digital inputs and outputs.) |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 22:55:52 GMT -5
"Which is basically what I believe TacT is now doing with Emotiva. Or did Emotiva buy the rights to the TacT technology? " My guess, and it surely is a guess, is that TacT wants to break into the HT/Surround Sound market and Emo is providing them with a testbed (and funding) for this. This version of TacT is licensed only to Emo. I'm betting they take what they learn from this and will then "chip-ify" it for licensing to other mfgrs.... -RW- I'm guessing/hoping that Emotiva, or rather Dan, is going to buy TacT Audio. Boz has been too busy with his new venture to continue running TacT Audio: ptlxglobal.com/about/ |
|
|
|
Post by amt on Dec 12, 2012 23:01:58 GMT -5
Tip, have you been happy with the TacT version in your TCS mkIII?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 23:07:08 GMT -5
When Peter Lyngdorf and Boz separated, with Boz ending up owning TacT Audio, Peter then started Lyngdorf Audio. He had to come up with an entirely new RCS that was not based on Boz's TacT RCS. The first RCS by the engineer Lyngdorf hired wasn't very good and wasn't released, so Peter then hired another engineer who designed RoomPerfect. Tip |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Dec 12, 2012 23:15:46 GMT -5
When Peter Lyngdorf and Boz separated, with Boz ending up owning TacT Audio, Peter then started Lyngdorf Audio. He had to come up with an entirely new RCS that was not based on Boz's TacT RCS. The first RCS by the engineer Lyngdorf hired wasn't very good and wasn't released, so Peter then hired another engineer who designed RoomPerfect. Tip Tip, Thanks for your thoughts  . Have you heard RoomPerfect? If so how would you say it performed? Bill |
|
|
|
Post by djoel on Dec 12, 2012 23:19:52 GMT -5
As I recall TacT was design for 2 channel in mind initially, as they're a two channel base company first. So I hope they don't abandon their roots, or change things in favor of Home theater. The first TacT RCS was 2.2 channels, and was named the "RCS 2.2". The next product was the "RCS 2.0", which was only two main channels, but did provide for multiple measurements (I think up to 8 IIRC). There was also a "RCS 2.0S", which was an updated RCS 2.0 based on the RCS 2.2X. Then came the "RCS 2.2X" which was 2.2. It was updated and released as the "RCS 2.2XP" (that was the unit used at Emofest) and the RCS 2.2 Mini. TacT also had the TCS (Theater Correction system) that had 10 output channels, then the TCS mkII, and finally the TCS mkIII, which has 12 output channels. Any channel of the TCS could be configured for main or sub correction. In addition there was a special 2+2 version that implemented Ralph Glasgal's Ambiophonics surround system. TacT also has applied its RCS to its line of integrated stereo amps in the form of the 2150XDM. Thanks Tip, great info Djoel |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 23:25:02 GMT -5
Tip, have you been happy with the TacT version in your TCS mkIII? I just got it last week. Someone I knew in the TacT Audio Users Group was moving into a smaller house and was selling his HT system including his TCS mkIII. I got it for a very good price, otherwise I would have waited for the RMC-1 (I have an RCS 2.2X I was using with my UMC-1 for the front channels). As far as the room correction, it is much better than my RCS 2.2X -- so I'm happy about that. ;D But I'm having a lot of problems with the HDMI audio inputs -- so I'm sad about that.  I may end up sending it back (I used PayPal so I have some recourse) if I can't solve the problems I'm having with the HDMI inputs. But the digital and analog inputs work great, including Dolby on the S/PDIF and TosLink digital inputs. |
|
|
|
Post by Tip on Dec 12, 2012 23:50:27 GMT -5
When Peter Lyngdorf and Boz separated, with Boz ending up owning TacT Audio, Peter then started Lyngdorf Audio. He had to come up with an entirely new RCS that was not based on Boz's TacT RCS. The first RCS by the engineer Lyngdorf hired wasn't very good and wasn't released, so Peter then hired another engineer who designed RoomPerfect. Tip Tip, Thanks for your thoughts . Have you heard RoomPerfect? If so how would you say it performed? Bill No I haven't. There aren't any Lyngdorf (or TacT) dealers in Northeast Ohio. I think I'd have to travel to Indianapolis or Philadelphia to hear a Lyngdorf. I do know of someone on TAUG who has both and likes TacT better. But part of that is because RoomPerfect provides little user adjust-ability of the target curve where TacT gives the user complete control. Too bad most of the brick-and-mortar audio stores have gone out of business in the last ten years. I haven't even heard Audyssey or the other HT RCS systems. So I'm not an RCS expert, I just play one on the Lounge  |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,093
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 13, 2012 7:55:27 GMT -5
Tip... Purdue Chem Engr....class of 86
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,093
|
Post by klinemj on Dec 13, 2012 20:28:30 GMT -5
Here's something I have worked with in the past. Imagine that some day in the future you can go to a scanning site, have your own head scanned, have one of these made to match your own head, and use it to measure your room... Maybe with an XMC-10 with Tact 10.0!!! www.head-acoustics.de/eng/nvh_binaural_recording_systems.htmThink of how perfect your room would sound to you! Mark |
|
|
|
Post by richardrc on Dec 13, 2012 21:47:02 GMT -5
Here's something I have worked with in the past. Imagine that some day in the future you can go to a scanning site, have your own head scanned, have one of these made to match your own head, and use it to measure your room... Maybe with an XMC-10 with Tact 10.0!!! www.head-acoustics.de/eng/nvh_binaural_recording_systems.htmThink of how perfect your room would sound to you! Mark Why stop at the head? I vote for whole body clone, send them to work so you can play in the HT all day. |
|
. Have you heard RoomPerfect? If so how would you say it performed?
I may end up sending it back (I used PayPal so I have some recourse) if I can't solve the problems I'm having with the HDMI inputs. But the digital and analog inputs work great, including Dolby on the S/PDIF and TosLink digital inputs.
