Gosh, so many differences. First of all, I think Inguz is a huge step in the right direction. I've read and re-read the literature and I applaud the developers for having a great idea an executing it.
A few downsides. It is a bit limited, a bit complex, and it is a Windows only application. A lot of people in the creative and academic fields use macs and I'm one of them. Still, I absolutely -- absolutely -- think they have the right idea! Why not use your computers processing to analyze sound, create filters, and attach them to the software? This is easier, cheaper, and no doubt sonically cleaner than spending thousands of dollars on a TacT unit. Remember: more stuff in the audio signal can only degrade sound. The very best stuff just keeps it close to the source (your CD or whatever). If I were a PC user, I would support them, 100%, even if I didn't always use the software. No, on the cheap side, the Behringer deq2496, like, on the expensive side, the Z-Systems RDQ-1 (I have both), can operate in the digital domain. This is nice because it means that, as with Inguz, you alter the signal before it hits your DAC. If you have a good jitter-eliminating DAC, then the device is effectivel transparent. The Behringer is nice because it is quite versatile. The automated function is a bit goofy and not really intended for home use. However, the graphic EQ and parametric EQ functions are easy to use -- assuming you have experience with this stuff -- and they pack quite a lot of punch. To measure the room, I use a DBX RTA-M mic. I have had this calibrated and I load the calibration file into my software. The mic runs to a Presonus Firebox audio device, which is perfectly flat in response, and that runs into my Powebook. There, the impulse is recorded and analyzed by Fuzzmeasure, which is a powerful, professional measurement software package. How do I get the impulse? Fuzzmeasure shoots the sine sweep out the laptops audio output; there I have a 1/8->RCA splitter cable that runs to the amps (folks, you don't need a $1,000 cable for this. We're testy frequency, not audio quallity.) So, impulse, measure, look at results, tweak EQ, repeat. No doubt, an even more automated system is superior. A dream for me would be a plugin to Fuzzmeasure that would allow one to match real measurements to target curves and then export filters to Slim Server. Maybe if I buy the developere lunch for a year....! In the meantime, I would not hesitate to use Inguz, especially if you're not familiar with manual EQ. It can be a slippery slope. I was involved in music quite a bit in my youth, so it is not new to me; but, it is not for everybody. stevo;145868 Wrote: > What is the advantage of using the approach above over using DRC > software on the computer and do the correction before the Transporter? > Have you investigated www.inguzaudio.com ? > > stevo -- highdudgeon Really nice Harbeths. Nuforce amps. Digital EQ. Lavry DA10. SB3. Transporter on the way. This is my "main system." The nicest thing was doing away with the preamp. The SB3 is a perfect Transport. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ highdudgeon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2195 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28259 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
