Room Correction for 2 Channel?
- Thread starter audioguy
- Start date
Kal, since you suggested I look into Trinnov for 2 channel Xover / EQ, I spoke with these guys and am about I am about to pull the plug on a 30 day trial with on their 4 channel pro unit. First, this box will allow me to do 2.2, using an outboard DAC for mains and their internal DACs for stereo subs. But in addition, it can also be configured to do EQ, Xover and time/phase alignment of mains, center and mono subs when I play in multi channel mode. Since I know you are evaluation the Bryston which has no EQ, adding a trinnov unit into the mix could work very well, and be a very good complement to very good SSP with no EQ (potentially a lot better than the any of the bass EQ units working on the subs only). The cost would be dramtically lower than the ADA OEM units, and have digital in and outs to boot. Additionally the Trinnov 4 channel box would be SOTA for guys like me that run a 2.2 system, listen to 2 channel most of the time, and have a dedicated DAC for 2 channel in addition to their SSP.
Audioguy
I have some problems reconciling some recent experience with what I last heard (and think I know) about the current crop of DRC. fr the record I haven't heard them all.. I have heard the (early)TaCT, the Odyssey but not the DEQX...
It seems to me that we "integrate" sounds coming from different directions in a way that challenges a flat response a given position. Maybe if we could get the flat FR in a volume ... I am also of the opinion of leaving the upper range, say from 500 Hz to passive room acoustics...
I am not rejecting DRC. I am questioning the current implementations. I continue to believe that digital correction is the future. i question however the current philosophy and the implementation of those I have experienced, not for the usual (audiophile) reasons (e.g "corrupt the signals, more harm than good, etc) only that I am not yet entirely comfortable.
I like the idea of DSP in crossovers ( I have a good experience with the Behringer cheap DSP component and it has educated me on the value of digital crossovers). What can be done with digital filters is impossible with analog filters as simple as that ... So it is not a rejection but I need to understand more ..Maybe if I take the plunge in my next system (soon) and go DRC, I will get back at you for
Come to Atlanta and you can hear a TacT system. 
It allows control over how far up the frequency response you correct. In terms of a flat response in a given position, you do have some flexibility in that regard. Maybe the new Trinnov piece is the answer. But for me, when using a separate sub(s), I have no choice to use something like the Trinnov or TacT. And as I stated in a earlier post (on the Magicos) , integrating subs is really pretty straight forward, even if you don't do room correction.
But, as I have stated more than once, I am looking for a HT piece that does both 2 channel and HT. The TacT TCS wasn't my cup of tea, the Lexicon is in the trash, the ADA/Trinnov piece is more money that I am willing to spend, the Datasat is early in it's life so no conclusive word, the Cary Audio piece uses PEQ, not exactly current technology.
It allows control over how far up the frequency response you correct. In terms of a flat response in a given position, you do have some flexibility in that regard. Maybe the new Trinnov piece is the answer. But for me, when using a separate sub(s), I have no choice to use something like the Trinnov or TacT. And as I stated in a earlier post (on the Magicos) , integrating subs is really pretty straight forward, even if you don't do room correction.But, as I have stated more than once, I am looking for a HT piece that does both 2 channel and HT. The TacT TCS wasn't my cup of tea, the Lexicon is in the trash, the ADA/Trinnov piece is more money that I am willing to spend, the Datasat is early in it's life so no conclusive word, the Cary Audio piece uses PEQ, not exactly current technology.
Has anyone used an analog parametric EQ for room correction after acoustical analysis to find the deficiencies?
Others may differ, but equalization is one area in which I think digital technology has an overwhelming advantage. IMO, analog equalizers are too colored and insufficiently versatile for more than the most basic room correction. Except maybe when used to ameliorate a bad peak or two in the bass, they always seem to do more sonic harm than good.
One possibility, if you're concerned about the sound of the conversions, is just to use digital equalization only on the bass, e.g., with a Behringer or DSPeakers. This of course will work only if you're equalizing a sub or bi-amping.
One possibility, if you're concerned about the sound of the conversions, is just to use digital equalization only on the bass, e.g., with a Behringer or DSPeakers. This of course will work only if you're equalizing a sub or bi-amping.
I say this because this is what Bob Hodas recommends for room correction. Yes, this will only be used for freq. under 200Hz.
I know he has placed this (Meyer Sound CP-10) in a few studios, mastering rooms and audiophile rooms. Didn't Rives have almost the same thing called the PARC? or something like that. Was this analog or digital?
RCS is a 2 channel system with up to two subs (hence the 2.2 nomenclature). It can be a 2.0, 2.1 (my configuration) or 2.2. TCS stands for Theater Control System, and, as the name implies, can control a full complement of speakers/subs and decode the latest CODECS from Bluray discs (no video pass through).
The 2.2 system, while not intuitive when you take it out of the box, is learn-able. TCS is much more sophisticated (and hence, complicated). You can do channel mapping, have as many subs as your heart desires (almost), sophisticated crossover management and of course, room correction on all channels. Not for the faint of heart but, with patience, can yield great results. The room correction algorithms are the same.
In fact, it is the same software. You just tell it what product you have. I had a TCS Mk III for a while but decided to go in another direction. I still do have and continue to use my TacT 2.2XP. Not only do you get room correction, but you get 9 memories that can contain different target curves (great for "fixing" old 70's rock CD's), different crossover designs, etc. Very nice product.
And it does a spectacular job of integrating subs to mains. I recently took my system to a friend who has Magicos that are pulled way out in the room (for imaging purposes). But when you do that you give up some low end. So we used his not perfect HT subs for bass, crossed them over pretty low (maybe 40hz) and, bingo, amazing sound. Spent no time deciding crossover slope over even carefully selecting the best crossover point. We just wanted to get a sense of what would it sound like. 5 minutes and he had a full range system flat to 10hz !!!
If he were to get a TacT he then gets to spend the rest of his natural born life diddling
Thank you sir! :b
Correct me if I'm wrong please.
* RCS 2.0S = 2-channel with room correction.
* RCS 2.2X = 4-channel with crossover & room correction.
{The .2 stands for dual subs, hence 2 more channels.}
* RCS 2.2XP = Same as just above, but the Pro version? ...Phase?
* TCS mII = 10-channel with crossover and room correction.
* TCS mkIII = Same as just above, but much improved (latest iteration).
__________________
- TCS, like you just mentioned above, stands for Theater System Control. [Multichannel.]
- RCS stands for Room Control System? ... Or Room Correction Stereo? [2-channel Stereo.]
__________________
*** The digital filters applied for correction in TacT systems;
are they the Finite Impulse Response type (FIR filters)?
Parc has a three band analog equalizer for below 200Hz I believe. Can only be used to tame peaks, not dips. Apparently a very transparent device - if not very with very limited functionality. No build in Xover, or time / phase alignment.
No the X is the old versio, and the XP the new. Apparantly the XP is a lot more user friendly.
Thanks Kal! :b
* Kal, I have the greatest respect for you (you might know that by now),
and would like to ask you this:
You own the Integra DHC-80.2 pre/pro that you are using in your own setup at home.
And you love Audyssey MultEQ XT32 PRO.
In your highest (best, top) opinion;
Do you think TacT is a superior Room Correction & EQ system?
Thank you so much sir for all you did/do in our Audio world.
... Stereo 2-channel and Mutichannelly speaking. :b
Very Best,
Bob
Dunno. It has been years since I used a TacT and then it was only a 2 channel unit.
Agreed. My experience with it is here: http://www.stereophile.com/roomtreatments/883/index.html
But there is, also, a PARC specialised for subs, the subPARC, which does add crossover: http://www.stereophile.com/content/music-round-33-page-2
For proper EQ of a room, you always want to tame peaks. You do NOT correct dips, as this can not be done with gain. You could add 100dB of gain if you have a null at 73Hz, but you'll still have it. The only way to get rid of null is either move your seating position or build a new room.
I see ...
* I guess we'll have to wait till next Summer before we finally find out about the new Multichannel pre/pro from Emotiva, the XMC-1, with integrated TacT Correction & EQ System (RCS flavor; but I'm not sure if it is the 2.2XP version, or perhaps an even more improved version).
Here: http://emotiva.com/xmc1/spec_sheet.pdf
And the main thread from over at the Emotiva Lounge:
http://emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=updates&thread=22367&page=1#364886
And finally the Podcast: http://emotiva.com/podcasts/012712/EmoCastMix.mp3
{Taken from here: http://emotiva.com/news/ }
Thanks for advice! Do these mics require some additional equipment (such as microphone amplifiers, etc.?) And, if yes, wouldn't it be easier buy a simple USB microphone - such as MXL Studio 24 USB ?
which can be connected directly to a PC ??
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |