advertisement


"Audiophile" quality hardware in the music industry.

dave said:
Darryl,

It doesn't take a piano player to tell when a bad piano player is playing. Audio equipment can be judged in exactly the same manner whether you or your scope like it.

Ohh...no worries either, when I need advice on some technical aspect of audio reproduction I'll be contacting the manufacturer of the gear as opposed to fellow hobbyists or recording engineers considering their track record.

regards,

dave
Click to expand...
Dave, noone's suggesting all equipment is alike, but this quest for PRaT is a very narrow approach to such things. Ironically, in many cases the room interaction will be the biggest culprit. Maybe the issue of PRaT isn't such a big deal amongst pros due to far more ideal rooms being the norm.
 
dave said:
It doesn't take a piano player to tell when a bad piano player is playing.
dave
Click to expand...

unfortunately it does take a piano player to know which piano they may prefer the sound of when playing....

being obsessed with prat is missing huge amounts of musical information at a swoop.
and i need not repeat the fact is 'you' as a listener do not know how the 'prat' should sound so how can you solely use it as a judgement value?
it leads to a samey sounding system that imposes an effect on the playback exactly like an engineer using an eq or a tube overdrive or a compressor....all the things you seem happy to blame for poor sound.
i blame the fact you have a inaccurate low transparency hi fi.
 
darrylfunk said:
unfortunately it does take a piano player to know which piano they may prefer the sound of when playing....

being obsessed with prat is missing huge amounts of musical information at a swoop.
and i need not repeat the fact is 'you' as a listener do not know how the 'prat' should sound so how can you solely use it as a judgement value?
it leads to a samey sounding system that imposes an effect on the playback exactly like an engineer using an eq or a tube overdrive or a compressor....all the things you seem happy to blame for poor sound.
i blame the fact you have a inaccurate low transparency hi fi.
Click to expand...

As stated before, I do not use PR&T as the sole factor in judging a hifi.

As far as a reference, we all have one built in since birth with our exposure to music so we know when there's a bad or good piano player playing. A system which conveys PR&T reveals the difference and nuances more clearly.

P.S. "unfortunately it does take a piano player to know which piano they may prefer the sound of when playing...." this reply has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I'm saying, you or I do not have to be a piano player to tell when a good one or bad one is playing.
 
cobblers again dave.

if you listen to free jazz or avant garde music or musique concrete etc what is the reference point......there isn't one.

this is were the whole 'prat' argument breaks down - again.

constantly saying that a tune dem or foot tapping prat demo is suffient is wrong.
it is also the whole reason i left the hi fi business in the early nineties because of the state of uk dealers using this sales technique and making crap systems that always need upgrading because they are not accurate enough in the first place.
 
if you listen to free jazz or avant garde music or musique concrete etc what is the reference point......there isn't one.

Actually I do and there is...

Again, it's not just about rhythm or the beat (or one that's easily recognized in some works by Messiaen or Varese for example)
 
I agree with DF that some electronics seem to pronounce leading edges. Naim certainly does, and I have long attributed that effect to the low-pass filter present in the NACs. I also call it the MSG effect.

That said, I'm not sure if some electronics are also particularly bad at portraying transients and dynamic contrasts. Some of the mid-life Musical Fidelity amps I've heard seem to be. Maybe it's the use of multiple poorly-matched power transistors at fault. I should call that the Mogadon effect.

Carry on ...

James
 
dave face facts 'prat' is irrelevant to discussing high fidelity.

things either sound better or they don't.

the prat,boogie,musicality and tune dems are a con.....the recording has it or does not and as you cannot quantify it you do not know how much of 'it' is supposed to be present or not .....logically this system of choosing inevitably leads to inaccurate systems that specialise in bass thump or droning tune playing at the loss of harmony or dissonance or contra melody and nuance put in the recording by the composer, performer and engineers and in most instances 'stain' the playback with these characteristics.
it's like the old ported bass + room resonance = poor low frequency transparency and excess coloration......bad bass in common parlance.
 
darrylfunk said:
dave , free improvising has no reference point in music other wise it is free jazz.
Click to expand...


If you've actually created improvisational music you'll know there's order in chaos. I'm sure there's some that won't pickup on it. Others will, especially those of us who create it and those who enjoy listening to it.
 
dave, i used to work for fmr - the record label and magazine maybe you should study some of the cd's we put out and classic improvised music re issues or read some of the books we put out about various musicians like the baschet bros or ornette coleman.
then come back and tell me about music and hi fidelity.
you do not have a clue mate ...your just an old linn/naim sales man stuck in the past spouting the same old disproved dogma.
 
Why would I care about what some firm or reviewer thinks or says about any musician? Hmmm...perhaps I should dance about architecture to get a better understanding about it as well.
 
dave said:
If you've actually created improvisational music you'll know there's order in chaos. I'm sure there's some that won't pickup on it. Others will, especially those of us who create it and those who enjoy listening to it.
Click to expand...
aren't we drifting off topic here?
 
you obviously know nothing about free improvised music then dave - the magazine is written for and by musicians only and the label all self funded by the artists.

check it out it's a tiny label supporting real grass roots music.

http://www.fmr-records.com/fmrsale.asp

quite why you often misquote or change subject mid discussion or take this head in the sand view at all these conversations is quite beyond me!!!

your obviously into a brand of hi fi and way of listening in a strange way more than real music which is fair enough it's a shame you won't be hearing some wonderful music due to your system molesting it so badly if as you say so many recordings sound poor on it .
 
darrylfunk said:
you obviously know nothing about free improvised music then dave - the magazine is written for and by musicians only and the label all self funded by the artists.

check it out it's a tiny label supporting real grass roots music.

http://www.fmr-records.com/fmrsale.asp

quite why you often misquote or change subject mid discussion or take this head in the sand view at all these conversations is quite beyond me!!!

your obviously into a brand of hi fi and way of listening in a strange way more than real music which is fair enough it's a shame you won't be hearing some wonderful music due to your system molesting it so badly if as you say so many recordings sound poor on it .
Click to expand...

Thanks for the lead on the label -I will dig into it once I'm off duty.

Somehow I've managed to create and enjoy improvisational music for four decades without an owner's manual. Listening to and evaluating hifi has been much the same without changes depending upon which audio guru is popular this month. So yes, I'm essentially an old dogma (myself) and probably won't be changing in the foreseable future;-)

Frankly, I'm not sure where I haven't answered your questions in a reasonably concise manner, but to be honest, it's getting a bit old going around in circles and it's not as if we're going to change each others minds so I'm more than happy to bow out of this thread.

I have nurses needing my services upstairs as well;-)
 
dave said:
Greg -As a reply to post #210 which was quoted...no, to the OP of the thread...yes. That hasn't stopped us for quite a few pages though.
Click to expand...
But you're continually bringing the discussion back to PRaT, yet can you give examples of pro gear which evidently fails this very specific test? If you can, that would align your direction with the subject.
 
Thanks Greg but no thanks.

I've totally lost interest now... and my comments were never about pro gear but home gear's inability to reproduce this portion or attribute of the signal called PR&T (and as I defined the term.)

I'm using the term PR&T only as required for rebuttal to darryl's harping on about PR&T in most all of his posts over the last several pages.

OK, enough...back to work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top