Misnomer for dynamics and timing (as defined by Collins).
I recommend to all to stop using terms that you can't explain in specific terms. |
Yeah, but nothing to do with rhythm and pace. Also, it no one here described timing accurately at all. An acronymn that's only 1/3d right is pretty misleading, IMHO.
Dave |
I'm not picking on you, really, but what's "transient response" and how does it relate to either Pace, Rhythm or Timing?
Hint, I think that transient response has more to do with the shape of an acute wave and not timing.
Remember, I believe that PRaT is a misnomer. The perception has more to do with the system's ability to produce dynamics (micro and macro) rather than anything to do with Pace, Rhythm or Timing. (The rhythem one borders on rediculous).
Dave |
Great explainations of the generally accepted interpretations of these terms; however, I'd like to point out that the Pace, Rhythm and Timing part of PRaT are misnomers. All but the most seriously flawed systems get these elements of sound reproduction correct.
All but the most grossly out of whack turntable will get pacing (tempo) right. If pacing is right, then rhythm and timing (another word for rhythm) are right.
So what leads to this impresion of better PRaT for one system vs. another, it's the ability to effortlessly reproduce dynamic range, from the very softest to the very loudest, without introducing other undesireable elements (distortion).
I'm a serious musician and we often use dynamics and accents to imply speed and motion. If you don't hear the dynamic change, then the music sounds, lifeless and uninvolving.
PRaT and Slam are the same, IMHO, except that Slam refers to bass dynamic performance.
PRaT seems to be a permanent part of our lexicon, but I think misunderstanding it might do more harm than good. I'd like to see it banished, but I'm only one vote.
In those instances where Pace is flawed, it's usually the fault of the TT or the TT's power supply variability, causing wow and flutter or speed inaccuracy. Guess what, when you fix these things you get better "slam". Applying this to other components, where electrons flow in nanoseconds is folly, IMHO.
DAve |
04-29-08: 4est said:
"I too disagree with Dcstep about PRaT. IMO it is more about subtle micro dynamic shading- even within a single note/chord as it is played. Slam is only the leading edge of the note, when you feel the kick drum hit your chest concisely for instance..."
Hmm, I agree with everything that you say here, so I'm wondering in what regard do we disagree. I think that PRaT is really about dynamics, as you said.
Dave |
04-29-08: Rnm4 said:
"Dcstep. I disagree that every TT that's not "grossly" out of whack gets pace right. I don't think belt drives in general do. My Lenco does, though. Also, poor speakers or badly matched speakers and amp can be sluggish."
We certainly do disagree about belt drive TTs.
Now how does a bad speaker/amp mismatech impact either Pace, Rhythm or Timing? "Sluggish" maybe, but Pace, Rhythm or Timing, I don't see how.
I've heard bad speaker/amp matches manifest themselves mainly in the bass region, where a speaker needs more control and the amp can't provide it, resulting win woolly, bloomy, over ripe bass. (Nothing to do with Pace, Rhythm or Timing). I've also heard an bright amp matched with a speaker with very extended highs, resulting in a bright, etched, unpleasant treble. (Again having nothing to do with Pace, Rhythm or Timing).
I'm trying to get people to focus on the words "Pace", "Rhythm" and "Timing" and not use them to describe something that's not happening.
Dave |
Maybe you could name an vintage component that doesn't "time very well".
Lot's of times there is intermodulation distortion between the two-speakers (don't even talk about surround) and between the speakers and the room. IM distortion can make a system seem harsh and/or muddy and/or confused. Technically it IS a timing music, but has no impact on the pace and rhythm of the music.
Dave |
04-29-08: Jsmoller said:
"...prat would be how closely the music adheres to timing, ie. 4:4, 3:4 time, etc.?"
I can't wait to hear the answer. ;-)
Dave |
04-29-08: Rnm4 said:
"...Actually, my Naim Nait 3 was pratty with all sources, in a way previous amps were not, and in which my NAP140/NAC32.5 is, but my Scott 222c and Sherwood AM-7040 are not -- though I don't think that's a flaw in these latter, as I think Naim are (or were) designed with highlighting the prat-making bits of signal. Hey, it works, and is extremely exciting. As I said in my earlier post, PRaT can be introduced into a signal..."
Please explain how an amp alters either Pace, Rhythm or Time.
Dave |
I'm really curious about those of us not able to tap their toes with a CD player. I have tons of play-along CDs from Music Minus One and Jamey Aebersold and this has never happened to me. What are some CDPs that that will exhibit this problem? I'd like to find one to see what you guys are talking about.
Dave |
04-29-08: Rnm4 said:
""Please explain how an amp alters either Pace, Rhythm or Time."
Thought I did that, to an extent. Another shot: having microdynamics that do not slur attack and decay."
Ok, so we agree, it's about dynamics, not Pace or Rhythm or Time, right? That's my whole point. People call it PRaT when it's really dynamics.
Dave |
Well Rnm4, a blurred attack is better described as a blurred attach, not something to do with PRaT. That's my point.
I like Caspermao's assertion, that PRaT is just a lazy cliche. I add that it never made sense as an acronym in the first place because the word in the acronym don't match the attributes trying to be described.
Dave |
04-30-08: Tobias said:
"Dcstep, I have a Magnasonic DVD player that loses the beat. A pal has an old Pioneer changer that's even worse. From reviews that appeared in UHF Magazine long before I bought my first CDP (in 1999), the phenomenon was more widespread and farther up the scale in the early days."
I've never heard of this, but I assume it must be true since you say so, however I wouldn't describe that as a lack of PRaT, but that the CDP was a worthless POS that no one should consider. I've only been in digital since the late 1970s and never witnessed a CDP skipping a beat, so that's a new one on me.
Dave |
04-30-08: Jwglista said:
"When attacks and decays are not accurate, the music *will* lose "pace, rhythm, and timing.""
Please explain how. You're talking about the shape of the wave, not the timing.
Use musical terms. In music, pace means speed, rhythm means the timing between notes and timing means much the same thing. I've NEVER heard any electronic component impact that, with the exception of a very bad TT, with lots of wow and flutter.
Dave
|
Jwglista, I think we agree. I think it's unfortunate that someone coined this phrase and it came into widespread usage. It just confuses many, like our good OP on this thread, and perpetuates the widespread belief that audiophiles are a bunch of tweaks that don't know what they're talking about.
Oh well, windmill wins again...
Dave |
No further comment... ;-) |
Rodman, thanks for the great link. I think almost all the PRaT or Pace attributes come down to either Timing (as defined in that article) and Dynamics. This still leaves me uncomfortable with either term. It's interesting that neither "Pace" or "PRaT" include a letter for dynamics. That article talks a good bit about the importance of dynamics.
His definition of Timing was particularly lucid and really dealt with the issue of how micro timing sometimes doesn't come thru. The example of the bass player being ahead of the beat (the good ones actually do that by training in certain circumstances) and the inability of a couple of CDPs to reproduce that was right on point.
Dave |
