Agreed…
Sounds good = tune dem + PR&T
(Tune dem = following the tune, musicians clearly playing together).
Truth is…most of us know if something sounds good, end of. No need to be so analytical.
2 Likes
Same here. My current system (non-Naim) has it and so did my LP12/Naim 42/110 and Kans. Incidentally every supposed ‘upgrade’ from that early system actually diluted the musicality I think - but that’s another story.
Problem is that ‘musicality’ means different things to different listeners. Since we had basically the same systems back in the dark ages we probably have a similar understanding of what we mean by it. But consider someone who owned say a Quad/LS3/5a system back then. I would gues their undersatnding of what musicality was all about was very different indeed.
2 Likes
Is there any further writing available online on Tune dem and Prat that I could look at ?
It would be very helpful to know clearly what the distinction is between them.
Thanks in advance
1 Like
We ask that a system plays music in such a way as to ‘draw us into the music’…
So that everything in our local environment (anything not related to the music) becomes nothing more than background information and doesn’t interfere in the way our mind is captured by the music.
3 Likes
Not seen anything from Naim about PRAT but both Linn (‘Introducing Tune Dem’) and Lejonklou (‘What is Good Sound’) have a description on their websites. Assume I’m not allowed to link them.
2 Likes
Also a wonderful synergy in that system with pre-Cirkus bearing, etc. Made to measure 
1 Like
To eacb of us, yes …however we don’t all necessarily agree, in fact clearly we don’t all agree, though there may be areas of fairly wide commonality. So each person has to assess for themselves. And unsurprisingly how best to assess will differ.
1 Like
Probably helps that the material being reproduced has some musicality, tone, tune, feel, texture and space to begin with.
1 Like
The “tune-dem” approach is not necessarily opposed to the principles of PRaT. In many ways, it could be seen as a broader or more holistic approach, incorporating melody into the assessment of a system’s performance in addition to its rhythmic and temporal accuracy. One could argue that achieving a musical “tune” that “makes sense” melodically and rhythmically, as aimed for in “tune-dem”, is inherently linked with maintaining good pace, rhythm, and timing.
2 Likes
Agree…there’s lots of disagreement about why something sounds good (or otherwise)… but less disagreement about what sounds good (or otherwise).
There is lots of consensus here: Naim sounds good (I agree, even though I have followed a Linn path).
My point is this…we do not need to be analytical about why we like x, y or z. Life’s too short.
1 Like
But it makes for an interesting distraction from work, although I now sense a cold beer calling me on this hot evening… 
Sounds good (just could not resist that one!).
Rugby World Cup too!
1 Like
Not to mention rhythm, pace and timing…
2 Likes
I never did get the “tune dem” thing. Then again, I don’t really get “PRaT”. It either sounds good to me or it doesn’t!
4 Likes
I would imagine if I was a dealer, these things would be helpful in guiding a customer.
Similarly, when I first started out I was very happy to think I was on a listening learning curve - with no real preference either way.
Having my present system for some time now, I’m not sure these could be quite as helpful if I was looking for upgrades. In that - I could spend a whole lot more for something that’s not particularly better, just different.
A short dem of some upscale kit that seems at first off, could once lived with realign listening perspectives. Then going back to what once seemed right could then seem wrong.
2 Likes
It’s always seemed to me that the two main approaches to audio design were those that favoured speed, pace and groove (traditionally firms like Naim, Linn, Dynaudio, Leema Acoustics) and an opposing design philosophy that favoured holographic imaging, instrumental separation and timbre (traditionally firms like Quad, Pro-Ac, Harbeth and many valve amplifiers).
I feel though that this has probably been superseded nowadays to a degree because later Naim gear has sought to address both requirements rather successfully as have firms like ATC, Chord Electronics and PMC.
What I think this means is that you can now have your cake and eat it. When I approach evaluating a piece of equipment I don’t really think about it in these terms anymore. The ultimate reference is live sound. If we take a piano for example in order to reproduce it properly we need a system that responds quickly to dynamics and nuances in the playing of each individual note as well as offering accurate reproduction of timbre, scale, frequency and the acoustics of the room the piano was recorded in (assuming the session was properly mic’d up to incorporate not just close microphones to capture the piano but distant microphones to capture room ambience).
As others have said the ultimate reference is the master tape/digital file/sound of the live instrument in the room - anything that deviates from it is just colouration. It’s one of the reasons I tend to gravitate to studio monitor influenced designs in loudspeakers because they are designed (generally) to be faithful to the original recording in all its attributes. It’s as simple as does the girl singing sound like she could be in the room? Does the system offer realistic dynamics? Does the system offer full bandwidth sound?
In short I’m not sure I find ‘tune dem’ or even ‘PRAT’ terribly helpful.
JonathanG
11 Likes
I don’t even know what Tune Dem is, so I guess it’s PRAT for me 
3 Likes
I was reminded this morning, by a conductor performing at the last night of the proms, that Duke Ellington opined that there are only two types of music: good and bad. Oh for a simpler life.
5 Likes
I would give my two cents but I still don’t understand what PR&T is and do not know the meaning of Tune Dem.
If anyone may enlighten me, thanks.
P.S.
I googled Tune Dem, and still think that all this perceptual philosophy applied to reproduced music is another dirty job on manufacturers’ and reviewers’ part to replace reality with virtuality. I wonder if the three questions quoted on Linn’s website have ever been posed by someone to themselves while listening to live music.
2 Likes
I agree. Better to shorten it to anal.
2 Likes