How is the TacT RCS 2.0 as a pre amp vs

I think it depends on your frame of reference. When I picked up the TacT RCS 2.0 about a 8 months ago....I had every intention of using it as a preamp and selling off my Placette Dual Mono Preamp. I did extensive a-b comparisons between the TacT alone as a room correction device, preamp, and volume control vs. the TacT at fixed volume (0db) into the Placette. I found the sound to be more analogue when the TacT was fed into the Placette. I've kept the Placette (as well as the TacT) and have never looked back. Also, keep in mind that if you listen with marked attenuation from teh digital volume control, you will also be lossing significant amounts of signal clarity.

Metaphysics: I am NOT using the TacT as a DAC. I am only using the TacT as a digital in - digital out room correction device. I am feeding the output from the TacT to a dCS Purcell and upsampling to 176k and delivering that to a dCS Delius DAC. I do have the DAC module in my TacT but am not using it.

Drubin and Metaphysics: I avoid using the volume control on the TacT and the Purcell/Delius. I believe (despite what the folks at dCS and Wadia say) that digital volume attenuation leads to reductions in clarity. For every 6 dB of digital volume attenuation there is loss of 1 bit. I'd rather feed the 2V digital signal from the Delius into the Placette dual mono and let the all Vishay resistor volume control boost that signal. I agree that the Placette is very transparent...but I do believe that Vishay resistors lead to a very fine sound. The sound is very realistic with superb imaging and an analog quality. I have extensively a-b compared the sound with and without the Placette and I much prefer with.

Drubin: I have the Placette dual mono active. The TacT...with the volume control set to 93.9 is at 0db. You can add up to 6db of gain from there...but as I described above...I run my TacT and my dCS gear at 0db and adjust volume with the placette.

Pls1: Since you've used both, I'd be interested in your comparison of the SigTech and the TacT. Please give us your honest, unbiased opinion! Also, I appreciate hearing that someone else has felt some synergy between the dCS gear and Vishays.

Pls1 and Lornecherry: I'd like to weigh in on the issue of the DAC in the TacT (wow...that rhymes!!) and the SigTech vs. the TacT in terms of room correction. I have extensively compared the 24/96 DA converter in the TacT with the following converters:

1. Bel Canto DAC 1.1 (24/96)
2. Monarchy 22C with piggyback conversion (20/44.1)
3. dCS Purcell/Delius at (24/96) to allow fair comparison
4. dCS Purcell/Delius at 24/176 and at 24/192.

I set up the comparisons using the placette preamp such that I could a-b two at a time with my wife hitting the button. In this regard, the test was blind.

I found the TacT to have an adequate DAC, but I actually slighly preferred the sound of the Monarchy even though it wasn't upsampling!!! The dCS gear clearly has a lower noise floor and greater clarity when upsampling to 172 or 196, but the comparison with the TacT at 24/96 is very, very close. The bottom line is....unless you have a really fine, upscale DAC like a Wadia 27ix, dCS Elgar or Delius with the Purcell, or Burmester or MBL or Goldmund etc.....you should get the TacT DAC. I was less impressed initially, but am now facing that I spent thousands on the dCS gear for very slight improvement.

In terms of the TacT vs. SigTech, I researched this issue for months. Cost was not the deciding factor for me. I did some analysis of my room and found that overall it was not that bad. Frequency was relatively flat above 500k. The main problem was boomy bass. The TacT cleaned this up very well. I enjoy the simplicity of the software and the sonic improvement in imaging and clarity. If your room is really bad...you probably should consider the SigTech.

Pls1: Sounds like we have very similar electronics!! What is your source and the rest of your system like?