PRaT

It's fairly clear to me what it's supposed to mean. Personally I think it's a bit of hype. What it means to others will no doubt vary. I personally don't need specific terms to understand what I'm listening to in equipment or a system. I either like it or not.

I think it originates with the original Linn Sondek and its touch of bloom that really made the bass bop along. Compared to the other top flight decks at the time it was a lot more fun (I thought anyway) if clearly nothing like as accurate. So PRaT was a way of describing what it did as a positive not a negative. And it was a positive if that's what you were after. Then it gradually got expanded to be a more general and meaningless term meaning something 'good' to look for in a system.


Only my own theory which for I have no supporting evidence at all.

There's a few albums I first heard on the LP12 - The first Montrose album jumps to mind - that I've never got to sound as good again in 30 years.

For me it means the emphasis of the leading edge of notes to the detriment of atmosphere, harmonics, reverb etc.

Naim equipment i used to have did this. I liked it at first but tastes change and so i decided to modify the equipment rather than swap it. Tantalum caps changed for film types where appropriate helped get some more music as did various other measures.

It seems to me that to emphasise prat you need to dumb down other parts of the music. Not something i like anymore.

Yeah, it has its place. Wouldn't it be nice if we all could have half a dozen different systems each with its own character (and one with no character of course)

Now back to the real world.

South Park should make an episode based on a Naim System. With everyone's ears bleeding to hell, whilst their bums are jiggy.

S.

PR&T and 'tunes' didn't used to go together in the dark ages of the UK 1980's audio scene. I was a tunes person as in humming/singing along with the song and listening for harmonies/melodies in the backing) first and foremost and still am - my Welsh half coming out? but remember an old friend and colleague, when he was then working at Grahams, visiting me in the home counties store I was at and trying to show me how good an Arcam Delta 60 was as it was so 'rhythmic' over say, a Creek (I can't remember what alternatives we compared it to). At the time, I found the Delta 60 amp totally un-musical and tonally grey, but it did hold the rhythmic aspect very well...

All this was rendered null and void when I was able to hear stuff that totally transcended what Linn and Naim were doing and for similar or lower prices - gear that was clear and precise (foot tapping) in a rhythmic sense yet musical in rendition of timbres too, together with the acoustic and musical aspects. Attending many live unamplified concerts and gigs at the time helped to put the two extremes into some kind of perspective - for me anyway. I've gone on too much about it in the past, so shan't say more now...

There's more to it than just component choice I'm certain. Make the design ring slightly (Arcam Alpha 8, Cyrus One, Ion Obelisk I think, Marantz 66 KI, Naim 110 and 160 almost rang etc.). Add a little crossover and higher order distortion too I reckon, plus maybe some band limiting.

Do you remember Bob Carver claiming he could recreate any amps “sound”? I’m sure he and you are both right in that you can engineer these things in if you are clever enough. Or sometimes get them by accident anyway if you arent!

I seem to remember the C-J amp was all second harmonic distortion, so he added loads until it mimicked the C-J sonically. Macca has the story far better than I remember.

There are seriously talented engineers out there, but not all of them are in audio. People like Tim de P (EAR) can draw a circuit upto do almost whatever the manufacturer wants. hard hitting MF's on the one hand and apparently, the soft rather ripe Shearne amps came from his pencil too. His own valve confections can have differing sound as well - 899 vs. the V6, the latter I love dearly as an ornament as well as the rather lovely musical sound it gives...

I had a bit of a back story to these the other day. Difficult to sell and the marbled front panels didn't appeal to the sheeple out there in Hi Fi land at the time...

Yeah, replacing tantalums for film caps in coupling and feedback positions tamed them a good bit but it is still the old RCA quasi complimentary output stage and the old naim pcb track layout is poor. Cant get rid of it all. Hang on wait, elna silmic caps all round even decoupling positions - that would get rid of even more.

Les knows his stuff alright. He has recently changed the output stage to fully complimentary by using a pnp transistor on the negative side and getting rid of a 100 ohm resistor and the baxandall diode. That has got rid of even more of the naim bite.

Best thing i did to that circuit was to get rid of the input stage coupling cap, output zobel and output inductor (the associated damping resistor too).  Improved things no end and made them sound slightly nva like. I am going to do the complimentary output stage mods and see what happens. Then compare to my diy nva style amps. Who knows, could also throw some current mirrors at it.

Mine was the audio equivalent of draft Guinness: Big, strong, smooth and velvety. I could’ve lived with it very happily. The Sonneteer was just cleaner and clearer when I tried it right after, so I was ok to let the Shearne go. The old “me” would’ve kept both.

Mine was the Phase 2 Reference and it had a gloss black fascia rather than the marbling, I like both finishes.