Take a look at what room correction can do for you.

[Sleestack]

I moved this from the room acoustics forum b/c I think it is important for people to understand what advanced room correction technology can do. I have been preaching the benefits of advanced room correction ever since I discovered it a few years ago. I truly believe it should be a part of every future digital system, especially multi-channel systems. The fact that there isn't more discussion on the topic here puzzles me, as it can provide a night and difference that few other components can. In any case, several room correction systems are available. I use TACT gear, but cheaper PC based soultions are out there (Accourate, Inguz, etc.) Make sure you pick one that uses impulse response and not just frequency sweeps, but do yourself an audio favor and start understanding what it can do for you.

This is a quick correction I made on my TACT RCS2.2.XP. setup. Pics of the room, in-room uncorrected curve and corrected curve. I have more tweaking to do, but that is the result of 10 minutes of work. This only shows frequency response corrections and not the time and level corrections applied.

 

[JoeE SP9]

Just when I thought I could spend some money on a new car you have to show those graphs. Seriously, the differences are impressive. I have to look into getting one of those Tact 2.2's

 

[billnchristy]

Thats impressive...I wonder what natural music sounds like...

 

[Sleestack]

Thats impressive...I wonder what natural music sounds like...

I'm not sure I understand your question.

I think you are asking what the uncorrect system sounds like. Keep in mind that I lower the subs levels when I play it in bypass mode, so the subs don't play at the measured levels. My room actually doesn't meausre that bad so the system sounds very good in uncorrected mode. That being said the difference with the corrected system is enormous.

 

[evilkat]

Sleestack, I saw that you mentioned some of the cheaper alternatives that are PC-based...can you tell me more about those technologies and where I can read up more about it? Also when you say 'cheaper' how much are we talking about?

Is the room correction you're talking about, something that's slapped on top of what the receiver does with YAPO or Dennon's Audyssey or is it more of a replacement for them?

BTW, very nice setup! Any more pics?

 

[Sleestack]

Sleestack, I saw that you mentioned some of the cheaper alternatives that are PC-based...can you tell me more about those technologies and where I can read up more about it? Also when you say 'cheaper' how much are we talking about?

Is the room correction you're talking about, something that's slapped on top of what the receiver does with YAPO or Dennon's Audyssey or is it more of a replacement for them?

BTW, very nice setup! Any more pics?

The Audyssey sytem is also a room correction system, however, in its current form, I don't feel it does what the TACT system or more advanced PC based solutions can do, b/c of the lack of user control. That being said, if you have Audyssey, you should use it. The TACT pieces come in separate 2 channel or HT pre/pros (RCS2.2XP and TCS MKII) or integrateds. You can pair them with TACT amps (which accept digital input only) or any other amp.

The PC based solutions are much cheaper. I believe Inguz's soultion is free and used by many slimserver users. Accourate is developed by Uli, a former TACT user. Uli is very talented and knowledgeable and his PC based solution is very thorough. It does cost about $500 for the license.

I'll dig up some links for those and others.

I think for most people, one of the PC based solutions is a nice start. It will be limited to a 2 channel system, but should teach you about the benefits of room correction. Advanced room correction isn't just about frequency response correction. It isn't just an auto EQ, which some sytems are. It also affects time, level and phase alignments. Multichannel correction in a more developed system is primarily limited to TACT and DEQx at this point, but again, those w/ Audyssey should try that out too. I believe Audyssey is working on a standalone solution.

Last thing, not all correction systems are created the same. The software that drives each system will determine the effectiveness of each system. I like the TACT gear b/c the software/hardware has been out there as products since the mid 90s. Their hardware is on the 3rd or 4th generation and their software has gone through countless updates. The effectiveness is clearly demonstrated above. The impact on a multi-channel system is startling.

 

[Sleestack]

Not my setup, but look at what the TACT 2 channel system did for another user with some serious room issues:

 

[billnchristy]

No, actually I meant how it is supposed to sound, ie, the corrected stuff.

Does it still sound "real"?

 

[Sleestack]

No, actually I meant how it is supposed to sound, ie, the corrected stuff.

Does it still sound "real"?

More real than I've ever heard in a non-corrected system. Completely transparent with perfect imaging and soundstage. People (especially old school audiophiles) have a hard time believing it... until they hear it. You can A/B on the fly with bypass mode and hear the difference right away. All the inforamtion is there, but presented the way it is supposed to sound. Somehow some people don't mind their room radically affecting the sound of their system but have a bias against correction. Technology is at a point where that is just outdated thinking.

 

[billnchristy]

Cool,

I am thinking of purchasing the Behringer DEQ 2496 to get a taste at what good in room eq can do and then maybe one day step up to the big leagues.

 

[Sleestack]

Cool,

I am thinking of purchasing the Behringer DEQ 2496 to get a taste at what good in room eq can do and then maybe one day step up to the big leagues.

That would be a good start. Don't overlook the software based solutions either if you are somewhat PC savy.

 

[billnchristy]

that would be great since I use the pc as my source anyways...which are available, I dont know anything about them.

 

[Sleestack]

that would be great since I use the pc as my source anyways...which are available, I dont know anything about them.

I'm grabbing several links and trying to summarize distinguishing features. I'll post them shortly.

 

[evilkat]

Went to the Acourate page (http://www.acourate.com/#TUTORIALS) and looked at their tutorials...holy crap. ALL of it went WAAAAY over my head. No idea what the heck they were talking about @___@

Someone needs to translate this for the common n00b.

I also looked at Inguz's thingy, but that needs something called a Slimserver, which fortunately appears to be some kind of GPL (i.e. free) software server?
(http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_overview.html) I don't know if you need the hardware as well to run the Server though.

Waiting for your post Sleestack...

 

[uli.brueggemann]

I think for most people, one of the PC based solutions is a nice start. It will be limited to a 2 channel system, but should teach you about the benefits of room correction. Advanced room correction isn't just about frequency response correction. It isn't just an auto EQ, which some sytems are. It also affects time, level and phase alignments. Multichannel correction in a more developed system is primarily limited to TACT and DEQx at this point, but again, those w/ Audyssey should try that out too. I believe Audyssey is working on a standalone solution.

I like to disagree.

With a PC you are able to get the most sophisticated correction system. You are NOT limited to two channels. You can use more than 2 channels either for a multi-channel or a multi-amping system or even a multi-channel multi-amping system.

Personally I run a 3-way multiamp stereo system but I already have used a 4-way stereo system.

It all depends on the soundcard (a RME HDSP9652 with 26 input and output channels should have enough channels) and then of course of CPU power (my 2.8 GHz Pentium has a 15 % load with 8 channels [4-way stereo] and filters of size 65536 taps).

Uli
www.acourate.com

 

[ronnie 1.8]

Sleestack, I reviewed the RCS 2.2XP at tact.com, and am very interested. Well, I was already interested in room correction, I think due to some comments you made earlier. What struck me is that this system measures and calibrates the left and right main speakers, and one or two subs. In a 5.1 system, don't the center and surrounds also need to be measured and calibrated? How are those speakers addressed? Does TACT make a 5.1 model? Well, just looked more closely, and I see they do. The TCS Theater Correction System. Hmmm, I'm not able to find any prices, which doesn't seem to imply this is an inexpensive system... Curious, what made you go with the 2.2XP, rather than a model that measures and calibrates a 5.1 system?

Yikes, just found prices... That may be a factor in your decision... Hmm, I really believe my room has HUGE potential for room correction (strange shape, has 12 walls). But these prices are waaay more than I can afford at this time...

 

[Sleestack]

I like to disagree.

With a PC you are able to get the most sophisticated correction system. You are NOT limited to two channels. You can use more than 2 channels either for a multi-channel or a multi-amping system or even a multi-channel multi-amping system.

Personally I run a 3-way multiamp stereo system but I already have used a 4-way stereo system.

It all depends on the soundcard (a RME HDSP9652 with 26 input and output channels should have enough channels) and then of course of CPU power (my 2.8 GHz Pentium has a 15 % load with 8 channels [4-way stereo] and filters of size 65536 taps).

Uli
www.acourate.com

LOL. Apologies Uli. I think most knowledgeable TACT users would agree that your programs are not the typical PC based solution. I should have been more specific in commenting on PC based solutions as I was not meaning to compare your program to one like Inguz. Of course, I'm sure you would also agree that PC processing power means nothing if the underlying correction program is not strong. I have heard many great things about your work and have thought about buying Accourate for some of my own testing. I simply haven't had the time. I also do prefer a system that does not require me to have a PC on all the time and doesn't require me to jerry rig my components, but that's just about me, my time constraints and component preferences. I have been very happy with the XP and wonder if Boz will be able to implement similar changes to the more processing intensive TCS when releasing the TCS MKIII.

 

[Sleestack]

Sleestack, I reviewed the RCS 2.2XP at tact.com, and am very interested. Well, I was already interested in room correction, I think due to some comments you made earlier. What struck me is that this system measures and calibrates the left and right main speakers, and one or two subs. In a 5.1 system, don't the center and surrounds also need to be measured and calibrated? How are those speakers addressed? Does TACT make a 5.1 model? Well, just looked more closely, and I see they do. The TCS Theater Correction System. Hmmm, I'm not able to find any prices, which doesn't seem to imply this is an inexpensive system... Curious, what made you go with the 2.2XP, rather than a model that measures and calibrates a 5.1 system?

Yikes, just found prices... That may be a factor in your decision... Hmm, I really believe my room has HUGE potential for room correction (strange shape, has 12 walls). But these prices are waaay more than I can afford at this time...

Actually, I use the 2.2.XP, the TCS MKII and the BOZ 216/2200s. The TCS MKII can do up to 9.1, but I couple it with the BOZ216/2200 (which provides up to 16 channels) to do 5.2 with each of my speakers bi-amped and utilizing external corssovers via the BOZ 216.

You are probably a better candidate for one of the Audyssey systems integrated in more affordable receivers.

 

[ronnie 1.8]

Actually, I use the 2.2.XP, the TCS MKII and the BOZ 216/2200s. The TCS MKII can do up to 9.1, but I couple it with the BOZ216/2200 (which provides up to 16 channels) to do 5.2 with each of my speakers bi-amped and utilizing external corssovers via the BOZ 216.

You are probably a better candidate for one of the Audyssey systems integrated in more affordable receivers.

Or a standalone unit from Audyssey, right? It seems the MultEQ XT is their highest end unit, and is available in many Denon receivers. Shoot, but not in my AVR3805. Is there any advantage to having the standalone vs intregrated into a receiver?

 

[AndrewLyles]

Hi Sleekstack,
This may be more of a philasophical question and I apologize it it leads that way. My understanding is that it is better to accoustically treat the room before implementing correction like this. I'm not trying to knock your arguement in anyway, I'm still learning and am just trying to better understand the arguements for both. I'm getting ready to treat my room with accoustic panels (god willing) and thought that would be the better and less expensive route to start with.

I'm guessing from the initial response curve that your room is untreated before you initiated the correction. (There is a question comming I promise.) I'm assuming that implemtning both is obviously the best method but which is the better place to start. Should I start with panels or implement correction and then move to accoustical treatments? I would guess that at the very least the corrective software/hardware would minimize the amount of panels needed, or is that backwards (The panels would minimize the amount of correction needed?)

I'm still looking for a good starting point for all of this.
Thanks,
Andrew