digital eq/room correction trade-offs

If you listen to CD, digital is a given, as is the processing of same prior to conversion to analog. Digital equalization degrades nothing and is of considerable benefit in adapting speakers to a specific environment. The straight wire with gain folks had the upper hand as long as equalization was done in analog, but this doctrine no longer makes any sense for CD. For a real improvement, get a digital preamp and skip an analog stage instead.

"I'm not convinced that I wouldn't just be winging it with these new systems. Not to mention the problems introduced with additional jitter as the signal gets switched back and forth from digital to analog to digital to analog."
I wish I could say that the automatic equalization (Tact) was the end of it, but it is rather the beginning of several rounds of trial and error, probably over several months. However, what's new! It's a hobby after all, and we are in it because we can hear and appreciate changes that others ignore. The good news is that one can hear the improvements (and errors) immediately and at no additional cost.
As to the jitter. No additional jitter is added in the digital realm. I do have the balanced digital signal running to an internal DA in the Tact, but I had a Wadia DA originally and both work well.
Finally, the analog source AD/DA conversions. I use a SOTA table with a Souther arm, an AT magnetic cart and a CJ EF1 preamp. I run the TT to the CJ and the to the Tact. I had a Quicksilver tube full function preamp with Mullards etc. and compared the pure analog with the AD/DA. To my ear the gains of the Tact system far outweighed the "loss" of the AD/DA conversion.
My experience and evaluation is much like Richard's.

TacT versus Lyngdorf. Good question, especially as they were recently partners in the same company (Tact).
My tech says that Tact (Baz) tries to accomplish more correction parameters than Lyngdorf with the result that the Tact system is more difficult to understand and apply. I would love to hear the specifics from someone more knowledgeable than myself.

re:
LYNGDORF: Goal is to preserve the speaker's frequency response & remove only room effects. You measure the drivers up close and then at the listening position. The software filters the difference between predicted (anechoic?) response at the listening position and actual measured response.

This explanation came from the folks at Lyngdorf.
Martykl (Reviews | Threads | Answers)

comment:
This LYNGDORF plan makes no sense to me. So please pardon this rave.
1. Speakers, especially multi driver units, have complex output, phase, etc. patterns. How can these be separated from room effects?
2. Designers assume that their products will be used in rooms (not anechoic) and design accordingly.
3. Where exactly does one measure a multi driver system to get an "accurate" measurement?
4. The LYNGDORF amps appear to be analog input only. Why ad an extra set of AD/DA plus interconnect?
5. Finally, why would anyone want to preserve a speaker's frequency response? No passive analog crossover and driver system can get within shouting distance of digital correction. Look at the specs claimed (if not always achieved) and they are +- 2DB. Anybody should be able to hear a bunch of four DB variations.