Thank you for the kind feedback. I also wished I wold have been able to audition the PARC before taking the plunge with the TACT. As for my problems below 100Hz, these are very much room induced problems. The Guarneri's in my old room were capable of remarkably linear reposnse down to 45 Hz. In this room, I have sharp dip at 63 Hz and another one at 94 Hz, both in the 12 dB range. Further up the spectrum, I get another sharp dip of about 6 dB at 158 Hz. The rest is pretty flat indeed. The dips are symmetrical oand nearly identical on both speakers, os I think I am dealing with some nasty room issues (floor and stairwell at the lower frequencies, and perhaps the suspended plaster ceiling at 158??). Setting the X-over point at 50-60 Hz takes care of the worst of the lowest dip, since the RELs do quite well in this range, but if could X-over at 100 I would completely clena up the bottom end, and probably be able to correct part of the higher frequency dip. Given that I could not make these dips go away with repositioning, I chose to set up the Guarneri's at the optimum distance for driver integration and soundstaging. They are now 2.75 meters apart, 2.75 meters away from the sweet spot. Distance to the rear wall is close to 2 meters, and to the side walls about 1.5 meters.
Review: Tact Audio Tact-2.2 Preamplifier
Category: Preamps
I have lived with the Tact 2.2X in my system for nearly three months. It replaced a BAT VK5i SE, which was (and still is) the best line stage I have had in my system. I had absolutely no complaints about the BAT nor a desire to "upgrade" while I lived in the US and had my system set up in my small, but properly designed and built, dedicated listening room (concrete slab floor, no windows, length and width chosen to minimize standing waves, etc). However, I had to give this room up when I was transferred by my employer to Venezuela. I was able to find an apartment large enough to have a dedicated listening room, but the new room is an acoustical nightmare, with flimsy sliding glass windows on exactly half of the wall behind the speakers, springy hardwood floors,a plaster ceiling suspended from I-beams, a large and deep staircase well leading into the room thru a sliding hard wood door, etc, etc. No matter how many CARA and RPG simulations I ran, the results was always muddy and boomy bass, and the BAT's midrange magic was utterly lost in the process. Listening to my system was no longer enjoyable....
So...after much deliberation, I ordered a TACT 2.2X from the local dealer (sheer luck- the ONLY hi fi store in Caracas carries Tact, and the owner's main business is industrial/commercial acoustical design and consulting).
My listening preferences run the gamut from jazz to classical to blues to pop to rock. I listen to vinyl about 60% of the time. For my Tact evaluation and set up, I relied heavily on the Chessky Demonstration disc, Holly Cole's Temptation, Jennifer Warnes' Famous Blue Raincoat, Neri Per Caso's So This is Chritmas, Jazz At the Pawnshop, Cantate Domino,and Belafonte At Carnegie Hall (all on CD).
I listen at fairly high levels (85 to 90 dB), and look for the usual qualities in a high end system, with a bias towards midrange warmth and "precise" soundstaging.
Before implementing any digital corrections, I assessed the TAC only as a DAC (with the BAT still in the system) and as a DAC/preamp. I found the TACT's 24/192 upsampling DAC to surpass the Muse's non upsampling 24/96 DAC in the areas of detail/resolution, soundstaging, and bottom end extension. Out of the box, the TACT was noticebaly brighter than the Muse, lendig a somewhat artificial character to the music, but this improved after a week of burn-in, and even more after connecting a Top Gun HCFI, Bybee Purifier, and Marigo 5.0 digital cable. Though the Muse on its own was warmer and more natural, I could live happily with either presentation.
Taking the BAT out of the system revealed the TACt to be an outstanding preamp on its own. Yes, the BAT's midrange warmth was gone, but the difference was surprisingly minor to my ears. In terms of high end extension, soundstage width/depth,and imaging the TACT was definitely in the same league. Note that at this time my amps were Aronov 9100's - the CJ's came later...
Having established the basic merits and shortcomings, I moved on to the measurement and correction stage. Measurements using the Tact's calibrated microphone confirmed that the frequency response in my room was a nightmare below 80 Hz, with peaks as high as 10 dB and holes as deep as 12 dB. Also, due to room interactions, the right channel output level was ~ 3dB higher throughout a good portion of the frequency spectrum.
My first attempts at using the TACT to correct the response were disastrous. The TACT's user manual is good only as fire kindling. It is absolutely essential to join Tact's Yahoo User's Group and pretty much read all the messages posted so far, and even better to work with someone who has climbed the learning curve already. While the Tact is capable of computing and applying correction filters to make the response curve perfeclty flat...your system may not be up for it. After trial and error, posting questions on the User Group, and 3 visits from my dealer, these are some of the generalizations I've come up with so far:
1. The TACT allows you to completely change the frequency response curve of your speakers, to enhance the midrange, to boost the bass, etc. My counsel is -- DON'T. If you force your speakers to sound/act in ways they were not designed for, they will not be happy. I did implement a mild roll-off of the very top end to tame the TACT's inherent brightness, but after playing around with various midrange and bottom end boosts I settled for a target frequency response which basically reproduced the Guarneri's natural, very linear response.
2. If you try to fill in big "holes" below 200 Hz or so, you WILL overstress the drivers in your speakers. In the end, I left the "holes" below 200 Hz untouched unless the X-over frequency placed them squarely in the subwoofer's domain. The mid/bass drivers on the Guarneri's are simply too small to deal with anything more than a 1 dB correction at these frequencies. A hole at these frequencies is barely noticeable, and far less objectionable than a either a peak or the sound of your mid/bass driver reaching its maximum extension and trying to go further!
3. Conventional subwoofers are too slow. Based on the response of my Guarneri's, the ideal X-Over frequency would have been 100 Hz, but the RELs cannot deal with this. A x-over point above 60 Hz will muddy up the bass, since the REL's cannot move fast enough to sound musical when asked to reproduce 100% of the signal in this range. This is simply not what they were designed to do.
With the X-over set between 50 and 60 Hz, the peaks removed, the holes left alone, the left and right channel levels matched by the TACT, and the sub/main response time-aligned by the Tact the result was......a revelation.
The soundstage is huge, wider than I've ever heard it. Placement of instruments and soloist withing the soundstage is tack-sharp and very well delineated. The bass is flat and tight down to 16 Hz (yes,the Stratas DO go that low in my room). The midrange is detailed and articulated as never before, now that the mid/bass drivers do not need to reproduce anything below 50Hz. The top end is super clean, very musical and detailed. Brass (e.g., in Arturo Sandoval's "Hothouse") has the proper bite and blat but is never shrill. Low level resolution has also taken a huge step up now that the sound is freed from bass colorations.
Oh...as for the midrange magic lost with the BAT...replacing the Aronov amps with the Premier 8XS has taken care of that in spades. Using Svetlana EL 34's in triode mode, the 8XS bring a palpability, presence, and warmth to the mids that is to die for..and which probably would have been too much of a good thing combined with the BAT. Althought the 8XS "only" deliver 130 watts or so a piece, they are working well within their comfort zone since they too don't need to worry about anything below 50 Hz.
Last....what does vinyl sound like thru the Tact? Pretty damned good. The A/D module on the 2.2X samples the analog signal at 24/192 and that seems to be more than enough. Yes, perhaps some ineffable "air" is lost in the process, but the improvements wrought by the correction in other areas far offset this. To be fair, the Pass XONO (which recently replaced a Linn Linto in my system) helps a lot. The XONO plus TACT combo certaily beats my Linto sans TACT, so overall I'm a step ahead.
So (as my wife asked) am I "done"??? Of curse not! I really would like to try faster subwoofers so that I can raise the X-over point to 100 Hz and "fill in" the nastiest holes in the frequency response without blowing a driver in the Guarneri's. TACT makes their own subs for this purpose, and they are certainly on my "next" list.....
Associated gear
Linn LP12 (Arkiv B, Ekos, Lingo)
Muse Model 9 Signature CD Player
Pass XONO Phono Preamp
Conrad Johnson Premier 8XS Amplifiers
Sylvania Gold Brand 5751 Tubes
Brimar/Mazda 6FQ7 Tubes
Sonus Faber Guarneri Homage speakers
2 REL Strata III Subwoofers
Audioquest Diamonond X3 Interconnects
Audioquest Dragon SE speaker cables
CPC Top Gun Power Cords
CPC Top Gun HCFI Power Cords
Marigo Reference 3.03 Signature Power Conditioner
Bybee Quantum Power Chargers
Bybee Interconnect Filters
Bybee Ultra Speaker Purifiers
PS Audio Ultimate Outlets
Mana Level 4 Compnent Rack
RPG Studio in a Box Room Treatment
2 Siamese Cats (randomly placed)
Similar products
BAT VK5i SE Preamp
Linn Kairn Pro Preamp
Linn Wakonda Preamp
I have lived with the Tact 2.2X in my system for nearly three months. It replaced a BAT VK5i SE, which was (and still is) the best line stage I have had in my system. I had absolutely no complaints about the BAT nor a desire to "upgrade" while I lived in the US and had my system set up in my small, but properly designed and built, dedicated listening room (concrete slab floor, no windows, length and width chosen to minimize standing waves, etc). However, I had to give this room up when I was transferred by my employer to Venezuela. I was able to find an apartment large enough to have a dedicated listening room, but the new room is an acoustical nightmare, with flimsy sliding glass windows on exactly half of the wall behind the speakers, springy hardwood floors,a plaster ceiling suspended from I-beams, a large and deep staircase well leading into the room thru a sliding hard wood door, etc, etc. No matter how many CARA and RPG simulations I ran, the results was always muddy and boomy bass, and the BAT's midrange magic was utterly lost in the process. Listening to my system was no longer enjoyable....
So...after much deliberation, I ordered a TACT 2.2X from the local dealer (sheer luck- the ONLY hi fi store in Caracas carries Tact, and the owner's main business is industrial/commercial acoustical design and consulting).
My listening preferences run the gamut from jazz to classical to blues to pop to rock. I listen to vinyl about 60% of the time. For my Tact evaluation and set up, I relied heavily on the Chessky Demonstration disc, Holly Cole's Temptation, Jennifer Warnes' Famous Blue Raincoat, Neri Per Caso's So This is Chritmas, Jazz At the Pawnshop, Cantate Domino,and Belafonte At Carnegie Hall (all on CD).
I listen at fairly high levels (85 to 90 dB), and look for the usual qualities in a high end system, with a bias towards midrange warmth and "precise" soundstaging.
Before implementing any digital corrections, I assessed the TAC only as a DAC (with the BAT still in the system) and as a DAC/preamp. I found the TACT's 24/192 upsampling DAC to surpass the Muse's non upsampling 24/96 DAC in the areas of detail/resolution, soundstaging, and bottom end extension. Out of the box, the TACT was noticebaly brighter than the Muse, lendig a somewhat artificial character to the music, but this improved after a week of burn-in, and even more after connecting a Top Gun HCFI, Bybee Purifier, and Marigo 5.0 digital cable. Though the Muse on its own was warmer and more natural, I could live happily with either presentation.
Taking the BAT out of the system revealed the TACt to be an outstanding preamp on its own. Yes, the BAT's midrange warmth was gone, but the difference was surprisingly minor to my ears. In terms of high end extension, soundstage width/depth,and imaging the TACT was definitely in the same league. Note that at this time my amps were Aronov 9100's - the CJ's came later...
Having established the basic merits and shortcomings, I moved on to the measurement and correction stage. Measurements using the Tact's calibrated microphone confirmed that the frequency response in my room was a nightmare below 80 Hz, with peaks as high as 10 dB and holes as deep as 12 dB. Also, due to room interactions, the right channel output level was ~ 3dB higher throughout a good portion of the frequency spectrum.
My first attempts at using the TACT to correct the response were disastrous. The TACT's user manual is good only as fire kindling. It is absolutely essential to join Tact's Yahoo User's Group and pretty much read all the messages posted so far, and even better to work with someone who has climbed the learning curve already. While the Tact is capable of computing and applying correction filters to make the response curve perfeclty flat...your system may not be up for it. After trial and error, posting questions on the User Group, and 3 visits from my dealer, these are some of the generalizations I've come up with so far:
1. The TACT allows you to completely change the frequency response curve of your speakers, to enhance the midrange, to boost the bass, etc. My counsel is -- DON'T. If you force your speakers to sound/act in ways they were not designed for, they will not be happy. I did implement a mild roll-off of the very top end to tame the TACT's inherent brightness, but after playing around with various midrange and bottom end boosts I settled for a target frequency response which basically reproduced the Guarneri's natural, very linear response.
2. If you try to fill in big "holes" below 200 Hz or so, you WILL overstress the drivers in your speakers. In the end, I left the "holes" below 200 Hz untouched unless the X-over frequency placed them squarely in the subwoofer's domain. The mid/bass drivers on the Guarneri's are simply too small to deal with anything more than a 1 dB correction at these frequencies. A hole at these frequencies is barely noticeable, and far less objectionable than a either a peak or the sound of your mid/bass driver reaching its maximum extension and trying to go further!
3. Conventional subwoofers are too slow. Based on the response of my Guarneri's, the ideal X-Over frequency would have been 100 Hz, but the RELs cannot deal with this. A x-over point above 60 Hz will muddy up the bass, since the REL's cannot move fast enough to sound musical when asked to reproduce 100% of the signal in this range. This is simply not what they were designed to do.
With the X-over set between 50 and 60 Hz, the peaks removed, the holes left alone, the left and right channel levels matched by the TACT, and the sub/main response time-aligned by the Tact the result was......a revelation.
The soundstage is huge, wider than I've ever heard it. Placement of instruments and soloist withing the soundstage is tack-sharp and very well delineated. The bass is flat and tight down to 16 Hz (yes,the Stratas DO go that low in my room). The midrange is detailed and articulated as never before, now that the mid/bass drivers do not need to reproduce anything below 50Hz. The top end is super clean, very musical and detailed. Brass (e.g., in Arturo Sandoval's "Hothouse") has the proper bite and blat but is never shrill. Low level resolution has also taken a huge step up now that the sound is freed from bass colorations.
Oh...as for the midrange magic lost with the BAT...replacing the Aronov amps with the Premier 8XS has taken care of that in spades. Using Svetlana EL 34's in triode mode, the 8XS bring a palpability, presence, and warmth to the mids that is to die for..and which probably would have been too much of a good thing combined with the BAT. Althought the 8XS "only" deliver 130 watts or so a piece, they are working well within their comfort zone since they too don't need to worry about anything below 50 Hz.
Last....what does vinyl sound like thru the Tact? Pretty damned good. The A/D module on the 2.2X samples the analog signal at 24/192 and that seems to be more than enough. Yes, perhaps some ineffable "air" is lost in the process, but the improvements wrought by the correction in other areas far offset this. To be fair, the Pass XONO (which recently replaced a Linn Linto in my system) helps a lot. The XONO plus TACT combo certaily beats my Linto sans TACT, so overall I'm a step ahead.
So (as my wife asked) am I "done"??? Of curse not! I really would like to try faster subwoofers so that I can raise the X-over point to 100 Hz and "fill in" the nastiest holes in the frequency response without blowing a driver in the Guarneri's. TACT makes their own subs for this purpose, and they are certainly on my "next" list.....
Associated gear
Linn LP12 (Arkiv B, Ekos, Lingo)
Muse Model 9 Signature CD Player
Pass XONO Phono Preamp
Conrad Johnson Premier 8XS Amplifiers
Sylvania Gold Brand 5751 Tubes
Brimar/Mazda 6FQ7 Tubes
Sonus Faber Guarneri Homage speakers
2 REL Strata III Subwoofers
Audioquest Diamonond X3 Interconnects
Audioquest Dragon SE speaker cables
CPC Top Gun Power Cords
CPC Top Gun HCFI Power Cords
Marigo Reference 3.03 Signature Power Conditioner
Bybee Quantum Power Chargers
Bybee Interconnect Filters
Bybee Ultra Speaker Purifiers
PS Audio Ultimate Outlets
Mana Level 4 Compnent Rack
RPG Studio in a Box Room Treatment
2 Siamese Cats (randomly placed)
Similar products
BAT VK5i SE Preamp
Linn Kairn Pro Preamp
Linn Wakonda Preamp