gene said:
That is great your experience with TACT's system has been so positive, however lets make it clear that your statements here are opinion based on a limited subjective impression from a comparision in a single setup. Until more definitive data comparing all systems is reported, lets try to keep an open mind about all systems effectiveness and NOT declare a definitive winner.
Great care must be taken to achieve the most out of the Audyssey system including proper measurement technique, interpreting the results, ensuring your listening space is acoustically sound and you are using multiple subs for best bass distribution throughout the entire listening area.
I will contact TACT sometime early next year to evaluate their system. I am a bit disappointed that very little technical information is presented on their website about their solution while in contrast, anyone can read white papers and peer reviewed AES technical contributions on the Audyssey system which is what initially drew us to their system.
I'm not trying ruffle feathers here and yes, my experience is limited. My experience is broader than yours in this case when it comes to experiencing the various systems in a fixed environment. I'm not trying to be overly critical of the Audyssey system and certainly am not looking for winners or losers. We all win with room correction. Nevertheless, don't you think that significant additional user control, detailed/visual target curve analysis and manipulation, and dedicated hardware would probably benefit a room correction system's audible results? I'm sure you would also agree that any room correction system would benefit from the integration of fletcher-munson based adjustments and more crossover control. In setup, the TACT and DEQx systems also benefit from multiple subs and better acoustic conditions. However, I think an even better test would be to see how they all perform in a horrible or typical acoustic environment.
As for TACT's white papers. Keep in mind that they have been developing their products for quite some time. As early player/developers in the correction arena, I think they may have had more paranoia than they needed to. They also went through an extremely nasty internal split with Lyngdorf, with the correction technology being a major source of IP dispute... Boz/Tact obviously won that battle. They are on a new generation of technology, so I'd wait until the TCS MKIII is released. It should be soon, as the RCS 2.2.XP has been out for several months. There are a few 3rd party papers on the TACT system, but not their newest systems. TACT is also now primarily the one man development team, Boz. Unlike Audyssey, he never intends for his technology to be incorporated into 3rd party products, and is much more protective of the IP behind his hardware/software, warranted or not.
I'm not trying to be a fanboy here. Give me a better solution and I will gladly adopt it. I'm waiting for the TCS MKIII, but would love to compare a similar product if it is available at that time. As an audio enthusiast, I hope that you have an opportunity to hear a 2.2 cornerload-based, corrected system (if you haven't already). It changed the way I thought about 2 channel bass response. I also hope that if and when you test TACT or DEQx based systems, you take the time to understand how those systems need to be properly setup. Although I'm sure you learn faster than me on these matters, I found that there was a significant learning curve. If you spend extended time with one of the TACT systems, I think you will understand why it would be hard to go to an Audyssey system as currently implemented in the Denon products. Half the fun of the TACT systems is in the setup and target curve design.
